Apart from bombing the hell out of them, there’s really nothing we can do to stop Iran from gaining enhanced nuclear capabilities.

Sure, sanctions help, but if China won’t play ball and stop importing their oil, we’ll never be able to control their actions.

And Robert Gates echoes this…

[...] in his memo, Mr. Gates wrote of a variety of concerns, including the absence of an effective strategy should Iran choose the course that many government and outside analysts consider likely: Iran could assemble all the major parts it needs for a nuclear weapon — fuel, designs and detonators — but stop just short of assembling a fully operational weapon.

In that case, Iran could remain a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty while becoming what strategists call a “virtual” nuclear weapons state. [...]

Several officials said the highly classified analysis, written in January to President Obama’s national security adviser, Gen. James L. Jones, came in the midst of an intensifying effort inside the Pentagon, the White House and the intelligence agencies to develop new options for Mr. Obama. They include a set of military alternatives, still under development, to be considered should diplomacy and sanctions fail to force Iran to change course.

Officials familiar with the memo’s contents would describe only portions dealing with strategy and policy, and not sections that apparently dealt with secret operations against Iran, or how to deal with Persian Gulf allies.

One senior official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the memo, described the document as “a wake-up call.” But White House officials dispute that view, insisting that for 15 months they had been conducting detailed planning for many possible outcomes regarding Iran’s nuclear program.

Still…my question to all of you who think Iran will use their nuclear program to try and destroy Israel…do you really think they would risk the lives of everybody in their country?

Because, if they decide to bomb Israel, I think we all realize that Iran, as a nation, will not exist anymore. Every nuclear nation will bomb them back to the stone age…and then some.

Still, what do you think? Is Gates pronouncement a sign of weakness or an acknowledgement of reality?

All of this is very straightforward, but it bears repeating since so many on the right cried foul last week.

So, basically, this new policy will deter nations from taking the path that Iran and North Korea have taken since they know we won’t strike them with nuclear weapons…thus taking away a key argument from those who would seek nuclear capabilities.

Also, and let’s make sure this holds the appropriate weight…the agreement with Russia was historic. First, it definitely started a new relationship with our friend/foe and that shouldn’t be discounted. Second, even though this treaty only means a 30% reduction now, it paves the way for a significant drawdown between the two countries in the future. Third, we’re not giving up missile defense in Europe. Of course, Russia is saying they could withdraw, but that’s their style. However, there’s a difference between diplomacy and reality, and this is where I wish my friends on the right wouldn’t be so reactionary.

Still…I want to hear your thoughts. After the smoke has cleared, what do you think of this new policy and treaty?

NY Times link…

There’s a difference between sensationalism and lying…and the above is a lie. The US has known that Iran had a second “secret” nuclear plant since at least 2002-2003.

Here’s more from The Policy Page:

The truth is that Iran only decided to reveal the existence of the uranium enrichment operation to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) when it discovered that at least three countries had already known about the plant for a number of years.

Indeed, the United States not only knew about the facility, our intelligence had already learned that the plant was too small to be used to produce nuclear energy (Iran’s professed purpose for their nuclear program) and would likely only have value for producing nuclear weapons – one to two bombs per year. American intelligence also knew that the plant was about three months from being completed to the point where they could begin operating centrifuges inside the location.

But hey, never let the truth get in the way of an opportunity to bash Obama. That would be bad for business.

Moving on…

Alan wrote yesterday about things heating up with North Korea, and nownuclear tensions are growing on the high seas…

The U.S. military is preparing for a possible intercept of a North Korean flagged ship suspected of proliferating weapons material in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution passed last Friday, FOX News has learned.

The USS John McCain, a Navy destroyer, is positioning itself in case it gets orders to intercept the ship Kang Nam as soon as it leaves the vicinity off the coast of China, according to a senior U.S. defense official. The order to inderdict has not been given yet, but the ship is moving into the area.

“Permission has not been requested. Nor is it clear it will be,” a military source told FOX News. “This is a very delicate situation and no one is interested in precipitating a confrontation.”

Here’s the question…if this isn’t sanctioned by the White House, why are they moving into position? Is that protocol? Genuinely, I don’t know.

And to that point, how ironic is it that the ship is the USS John McCain?

More as it develops…

Looks like last week’s nuclear test angered a key ally too.

From Bloomberg:

China suspended government exchanges with North Korea after Kim Jong-Il’s regime last week tested a nuclear device and fired short-range missiles, Yonhap News said.

China has halted plans to send officials to North Korea and won’t accept visits from Kim’s government either, the Korean- language news agency said today, citing unidentified diplomatic sources in Beijing.

China’s foreign ministry has said the country “resolutely opposes” North Korea’s nuclear test. China on May 25 agreed with the U.S., Japan and Russia to work toward a United Nations Security Council resolution censuring North Korea. The U.S. and Japan want the statement to call for cutting the communist country’s global financial ties, UN diplomats said.

And that begs the question: if China can’t get through to North Korea, who can? After all, China has long been seen as one of the only real partner North Korea has, and if they can’t exert some type of control over them…what then?

Troubling stuff.

Well, North Korea has the world’s attention. Exploding a nuclear bomb and launching missile tests will do that. All that’s left now is for the world to respond.

North Korea has long been a foreign policy conundrum, frustrating a long line of U.S. presidents who’ve attempted to stop the so-called hermit nation from threatening its neighbors. North Korea’s leadership has repeatedly placed raw pride over any other consideration, content to let their people suffer rather than enter normal relations with the world. To complicate matters more, both Russia and China have, at various times, backed North Korea, finding such alliances a convenient way to irritate the United States and our allies or, in China’s case, the easiest way to prevent massive numbers of refugees from streaming over their border.

Has this latest outburst from North Korea changed anything? Early indications are that, if nothing else, the world is generally united against Pyongyang.

Russia, which called the test a “serious blow” to the effort to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, suspended a Russia-North Korean intergovernmental trade and economic commission, apparently in response to the nuclear test. The slap on the wrist was a telling indication that Moscow, once a key backer of North Korea, was unhappy with Pyongyang.

And China, which has been the closest thing North Korea has to a friend, is reacting by holding high-level meetings with South Korea to discuss ways to respond.

At this point, I doubt China will want to do anything which might create the feared refugee crisis. And outside of military action – which really isn’t on the table for a large number of reasons – nothing will change in North Korea without Chinese intervention. That leaves President Obama in an unenviable position. He has to take a tough stand but knows he’s no more likely to directly affect North Korea than were his predecessors. As such, his best bet is to work behind the scenes with Chinese and Russian officials (because it’s always prudent to include the Russians in these matters) to develop a coordinated and meaningful response.

Unfortunately, that’s not the kind of resolute response presidents (and the American people) prefer. But I’m not exactly sure what other options we have.

Before anyone jumps up and declares this cartoon tasteless, I do not condone genocide.  I just want to imply in a satirical way that these two regimes are shooting each other in the foot with their nuclear tests.  For now it may seem that they both have a long while to go before developing a considerable threat, but in tandem I think this sets up two fronts that UN and Washington are not fully prepared to deal with.  I pray that this situation or any detonation does not triggers a nuclear assault…I just want to illustrate the absurdity before our eyes.

Some good news already from G20:

After a meeting between the two men in London, on the eve of the G20 summit, President Obama also accepted an invitation to fly to Moscow in July, by which time both sides hope negotiators from both countries will have worked out an arms control deal to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (Start) which expires on 5 December. The negotiators were told to begin work at once.

There were no specific figures in the statements issued after the meeting at Whitfield House, the US embassy residence, but the two leaders agreed that the new deal would go further than the Moscow treaty that their predecessors, George Bush and Vladimir Putin, agreed in 2002. The treaty stipulates operationally deployed (ready to fire) arsenals of 1,700-2,200 warheads, suggesting the goal of a new treaty would be to go below 1,700, and a target figure mentioned as a possibility by both sides is 1,500 warheads each.

No doubt these are just first steps, but I find it much more promising than hearing that Obama saw into Medvedev’s soul.

I’m just saying…

Hahaha, well Mitt…you might want to tell Dick Lugar that.

I swear, the more Mitt talks, the less credible he seems. I don’t know how he does it.

We’re spending our money to help them build nuclear energy plants?

Why?

Yes, I realize they’re a friend, but let’s not forget that Saudi Arabia is not a democracy and giving them nuclear energy, when they could be one of the biggest users of solar energy with as much sun as they get, doesn’t make really make a whole lot of sense in the current geo-political climate.

I’m puzzled.

How about you?