What Has Recent Events Taught Rogue Leaders?

[Whistler]

The US invades Iraq, threatens the same to Iran who have no nuclear weapons, and negotiates with Pakistan, and North Korea who do.

I would be working my covert fanny off to establish a nuclear weapon.

I apologize if this topic has been discussed previously. Please let me know and I’ll delete it.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Whistler,

Developing nukes is far more difficult to keep hiddden than many realize. All developed uranium is supposed to be accounted for. It requires a special facility to be enriched to weapons grade. That is why the documents 'revealing Iraq sought uranium from Africa' were found to be falsified. Plus, the scientists who can 'do the math' are very few and far between.

Far more dangerous is the precedent that the US has set regarding obeying international law. They have basically taken a page out of Mein Kampf by saying, 'the strong have the right to do what they will, the weak shall submit or perish'. Who should obey any rules now?

I am happy to see the interim power of Islamic law abated, for a while, in Iraq. However, defying international law was one of the stupidist things Bush could have done. I read much of the political statements by Saddam, before the war, including the interview with Dan Rather. Saddam was far more open to international debate and criticism that Bush. Internally it was the opposite, I'll admit.

Further, Afghanistan is now proof that both the Rusians and the Americans still are foolish when it comes to religious fervor in a foreign peoples. Neither could fully conquer a small, backwards country such as Afghanistan, and unless they can full convert it's inhabitants, they never will.

[nova_satori]

North Korea restarted its nuclear program after Bush added it to his "axis of evil" speech.

If I was added to the list, I would throw ALL of my resources into building a nuclear weapon. That is the only thing America respects.

Developing nukes is far more difficult to keep hiddden than many realize. All developed uranium is supposed to be accounted for. It requires a special facility to be enriched to weapons grade.

Even Israel cannot hide its program. What does THAT say?

America has defined Justice as "Might makes right." Socractes, plato and Glaucon are rolling over in their graves.

However, defying international law was one of the stupidist things Bush could have done.

China not supporting Bush was one of the stupidest things the world has seen in the past year. China will have to do the same thing if it wishes to take Taiwan via force. If the two largest economic giants stood behind this action, the rest of the world would likely have to stand by them.

[Whistler]

Far more dangerous is the precedent that the US has set regarding obeying international law. They have basically taken a page out of Mein Kampf by saying, 'the strong have the right to do what they will, the weak shall submit or perish'...

Ala Wolfowitz Doctrine?

...Saddam was far more open to international debate and criticism that Bush...

Saddam was setting President Bush up in my opinion. By destroying the chemical / biological weapons, Saddam was more than happy having the inspectors in country to prove to the world the he was being unjustly persecuted. The tide of world opinion was certainly turned to his side. The Bush administration felt it was now or never. Galvanizing the American public with selective intelligence against Saddam, they were able to accomplish the first step outlined in the doctrine.

Developing nukes is far more difficult to keep hiddden than many realize. All developed uranium is supposed to be accounted for. It requires a special facility to be enriched to weapons grade...

The million dollar question: Why does Iran with all their oil reserves need nuclear power? Or is this step two?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Whistler,

Believe it or not, a nuclear power plant was discussed for Ft. McMurray, Alberta, to power oilsands extraction equipment. Weird. If nuclear power was cheaper, why extract the oil? Availability may be a key issue, as well as the cost of the reactor.

For Iran, the oil is cheap and profitable, while a nuclear reactor is more costly only at start-up. Same with enriching facilities and missile factories.

[Whistler]

Iran certainly doesn’t have the environmentalists to contend with.

[nova_satori]

Iran has had reactor(s) for a while. That stupid pact with Russia started this. If they only had kept it, we wouldn't be discussing that. The pact was that Russia provides technical assistance and parts, and Iran returns ALL spent fuel and gives money to the.

[KrustyKidd]

Believe it or not, a nuclear power plant was discussed for Ft. McMurray, Alberta, to power oilsands extraction equipment.Weird. If nuclear power was cheaper, why extract the oil? Availability may be a key issue, as well as the cost of the reactor.

I used to work in the oilfeilds in AB. Much of the oil is not fuel grade stuff. They piped a lot to the states for road building and making plastic. From what I understand oil from the ME is a higher grade.

[Cameron]

KK - They call the crude from the ME, light crude.

[KrustyKidd]

Or sweet right? I do know that a lot of our wels turned sour and deadly for breathing but not sure if that affects the oil itself.

[Boydfish]

The reason that oil rich countries turn to nuclear power is that the less your spend on domestic energy consumption, especially as it pertains to extract that oil, the more you have available to export.

In terms of a nuclear power plant in Northern Alberta, that's still kind of silly: British Columbia has enough hydro on hand to keep all of Western North America lit up, plus enough potential sites to power all of the continent. Alberta would be better off just buying from it's neighbour. Hydro electricity is actually better described as "gravity power". As long as there is water and gravity, you've got power. BC will run out of neither any time soon, plus mother nature does all the hard work.

[Nuclear]

The UN has the IAEA...big surprise: they don't do a very good job.

If I were a rogue leader, I'd be scared. Iraq was one of the strongest middle east countries and we took them out in three weeks. Yeah, Pakistan has nukes, but all they have to do is open the hanger of one of their silos and we, sitting back on the other side of the planet and in the oceans with our SSBNs, will return ten fold whatever they could entertain throwing at us. They have a range of a few hundred miles. We can hit anywhere on the planet....

No match.

North Korea could hit us, but even if they hit us with one, there would no longer be any North Korea.....

The only nation on earth that had a chance against the US was the CCCP(USSR) and they no longer exist....Russia or China would stand the best chance, but we're on decent terms with them....