Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (155480)	1/23/2006 3:55:35 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793834

From Debka: Tehran plans a nuclear weapons test before March 20, 2006 – the Iranian New Year, moves Shahab-3 missiles within striking range of Israel debka.com January 22, 2006, 9:30 AM (GMT+02:00) Reporting this, the dissident Foundation for Democracy in Iran, a US-based watch group, cites sources in the US and Iran. The FDI adds from Iran: on June 16, the high command of the Revolutionary Guards Air Force ordered Shahab-3 missile units to move mobile launchers every 24 hours instead of weekly. This is in view of a potential pre-emptive strike by the US or Israel. Advance Shahab-3 units have been positioned in Kermanshah and Hamad within striking distance of Israel, reserve launchers moved to Esfahan and Fars. The missile units were told to change positions “in a radius of 30-35 kilometers” and only at night. DEBKAfile’s Iranian sources add: FDI reporting has a reputation for credibility. Western and Israeli intelligence have known for more than six months that Iran’s nuclear program has reached the capability of being able to carry out a nuclear explosion, albeit underground. It would probably be staged in a desert or mountain region and activated by a distant control center. Tehran would aim at confronting the Americans, Europeans and Israelis with an irreversible situation. At the same time, an explosion of this sort would indicate that Iran is not yet able to produce a nuclear bomb that can be delivered by airplane or a warhead adapted to a missile. The stage Iran has reached is comparable to Pakistan’s when it conducted its first nuclear tests in the nineties and North Korea’s in 2001. All the same, an Iranian underground nuclear blast, which will most probably be attempted on March 22, would turn around the strategic position of all the parties concerned and the Middle East as whole. The question now is: will the United States, Israel or both deliver a pre-emptive strike ahead of the Iranian underground test - or later? Or will Washington alternatively use the event to bring the UN Security Council round to economic sanctions? Tehran is already organizing to withstand economic penalties. For Israel, the timing is getting tight in view of its general election on March 28. Acting prime minister Ehud Olmert must take into account that a ruling party which allows an Iranian nuclear explosion to take place six days before the poll would draw painful punishment from the voter.

To: LindyBill who wrote (155480)	1/23/2006 10:29:15 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 793834

I guess it could be played up as a bomb shell. maybe it will. I read Pipe's reported exception and considered writing him explaining he was missing the boat. Pipes attempts to take what the Pope said as a hard and fast dictum of if this then that. But the Pope was speaking in terms of the literal interpretation of the Christian bible and the koran and the moral justification behind each. It's obvious that the purest Christian way is followed by very few when one takes it to the literal. The new testament completes the old and the life of Christ is about doing nothing really to worry about the physical world and doing everything to be saved for the spiritual world after one dies. In Christian doctrine it takes Thomas Aquinas to jigger logic so one can ever even defend oneself. The Pure Christian if one reads the Gospels to the literal will say to the Moslem, I love you and kill me if you must. How many Christians would do that? Love of God over life is supreme. Taking another's life even in defense is wrong. That puts man's world over God's. So both Christian and Moslem in the majority have put human interpretations on whatever books or words of the past. The issue the Pope illustrates is that interpretation is logically and morally possible in the Christian Bible and in the Koran it is not logically possible. It does not matter that men have done it and do it in both. Also there is little moral flexibility as the koran is by belief the spoken words of God and not man's attempt to express God's words. In Christianity and in the koran you need a Thomas Aquinas to get interpretations off of the main themes. Christianity is about giving one's life for God and in the Koran it OK to take another's if they will not admit to serving your God as you say it is so. Christianity has a default of give your life and let live. The koran has a default of take another's life if they don't believe if you can and even if it kills you.