The world is watching how the escalating tension between Iran and the United States and its allies will play out.
The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States have had their issues ever since February 1979 when the Islamic revolution ousted the US-backed regime of the Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. Months later militant Iranian students seized the American Embassy and held its personnel captive for more than two years.
In the past few years, the US has raised alarm over the nuclear program of Iran which they say is a guise to build nuclear weapons. Iran vehemently denies that its nuclear power program includes production of nuclear weapons.
In the past weeks, another issue has come up: Muslim rage over satirical cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed which first appeared in a Danish newspaper last year and have since been picked up by other European newspapers. Danish embassies have been attacked in some countries. In the Philippines, there have been protests over the cartoons in Cotabato City and in Manila.
U.S State Secretary Condoleezza Rice accused last week Iran, together with Syria, of inflaming sentiments on the Mohammed cartoons “to use this to their own purpose.”
In his press conference in Makati last Friday, Iranian Ambassador Jalal Kalantari described Rice’s accusations as “baseless, as always.” He added that Muslims have deep religious values and they believe that the Prophet Mohammed should not be insulted. He also said that no Muslim would insult Jesus Christ.
He doesn’t buy the reasoning that it’s part of freedom of expression saying that even in a democracy there are rules and regulations that should be followed.
On their nuclear program, Kalantari said: “Iran’s nuclear program is not ambitious and that would by no means be a threat against world peace and security nor against regional peace.
“Iran, like other developing countries and members of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, has rejected nuclear weapons decisively and firmly.”
Without naming the United States, Kalantari further said, “It is regrettable that nuclear-weapon states with the largest arsenals of nuclear weapons, instead of trying to build international confidence through implementing their nuclear disarmament obligation under NPT, are developing new and more sophisticated types of nuclear weapons and openly threaten to use them against non-nuclear states. They intend to hold on to their monopoly of nuclear know-how and technology and deprive other nations of their legal rights to peaceful use of nuclear technology.”
In fact, Kalantari said, Iran’s nuclear program was started with the help of the US-based Stanford Research Institute which conducted a study in 1974 during the time of the Shah. Anticipating the depletion of Iran’s fossil energy reserves, the study recommended building 20,000 megawatt nuclear plants before 1994. Development of the program was suspended following the 1979 Islamic revolution. After 30 years, Iran has resumed its nuclear energy program with the help of the Russians.
Last month, US President Bush said if Iran does not allay Western concern about its nuclear weapons building capability, sanctions (against Iran) “will certainly be a real possibility.” Asked if sanctions would include military action, Bush said, “I think it’s best I just leave it that all options should be on the table, and the last option is the military option.”
If the US is having problems with its military adventure in Iraq, attacking Iran would multiply it a hundred fold. Iran is the world’s fourth biggest supplier of crude oil and second in gas production. (Iran is the second biggest supplier of crude oil to the Philippines, next to Saudi Arabia). Two -thirds of the world’s energy supply pass through the Persian Gulf where Iran is one of the country’s along it.
Celebrating the 27th anniversary of the founding of the Islamic revolution last Saturday, Iranians staged rallies all over Iran denouncing Western interference to what they believe is Iran’s inherent right to pursue a program that would serve the interests of its people.
It’s a reminder to Bush and his allies that U.S. hegemony in Iran ended 27 years ago.
Well, what else is new ? Bush is a war-freak president. He knows that US is no longer that powerful as it used to be. Bush has not learned a lesson. How many American lives have been wasted in Iraq war? Now he wants to make war with Iran. I just wish the people of America will do something to oust Bush to end wars in the world.
IN THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy, what were the Rings? I think they were weapons mass destruction, the equivalent of our nuclear bombs. Just like now, it is claimed that as long as SOME have the Bomb, ALL should have a right to it too, “for defense.”
But I think this represents a deep misunderstanding of the problem. In the book/movie the solution to above dilemma is for the Ring of Power to be carried to the Crack of Doom, there to be destroyed where it was created.
But “ALL” do not carry it to Mt. Doom. Just one, brave, faithful, imperfect Frodo.
I think America must take up the burden of Frodo as well as act like Gandalf.
What I mean by the latter is that nonproliferation may be governed by a Treaty, but it is non-negotiable as far as the United States is concerned because their honest understanding of this problem is that a non-state actor cannot be allowed to have the Bomb, nor a state with a leader like Hitler who has openly wondered what the world would be like without Israel and America and is building a Bomb to make that happen. The problem of nuclear weapons is not a problem of equality among nations, for it is a problem bigger than any nation, even America. Possessing the secret of the stars should not be treated like the Subic Bay Rape Case.
Regarding the Danish Cartoons, I notice the Main Stream Media isn’t commenting directly except to give way to calls for the death of all idolaters . Are they being sensitive to Muslims, or just cowards–the Sentinels of the Free Press I mean?
I haven’t seen a single editorial or many opinion columns that even dare comment. All they do is say “So and so reports this and that…”
But where do they stand, I wish they’d say, and why.
Ellen, any comment regarding cartoon issue? thanks in advance.
Some may not like this analogy but it captures the essence of at least one argument for strict enforcement of nonproliferation. The problem of nuclear weapons is a lot like gun control. We don’t begrudge the Police for having guns nor do we allow children or criminal gangs to have them. This is true even though I also hold to the ideal that someday guns ought to be outlawed altogether. But who appointed America Nuclear Policeman of the World? — some people mutter. I think that was an accident of its birth at Alamagordo, New Mexico, when Shiva the Destroyer arrived on earth, and only Albert Einstein knew who had actually arrived. The analogy fails only because guns are not weapons of mass destruction.
But for anyone to think that Ahmadinejad has a right to clone the Nuclear Genie–that is sheer madness. I believe that America’s moral duty to humanity is to keep this secret safe from those who might use it as she and Russia easily could’ve, but didn’t, because of a different MADness.
Maybe Gandalf is the US and Israel is Frodo in an F-16 and GPS-guided bunker-busting plutonium-reactor wrecking bombs. I pray to God their aim is true as their hearts are stout.
Actually, I’m not as worried about Iran as Al Qaeda. Even if Iran somehow made a Bomb, even the insane mullahs there can’t hide Tehran!
But nuclear terrorism IS a case where somone must act as policeman, detective and Spiderman all at once. Or else all is lost, because one of the deepest insights the US War College says is part of US strategic thinking is this — there is actually no way to stop the proliferation of the nuclear secret.
Apart from a lil Uranium 235 that would fit in a coke can
e-mc²
So nonproliferation will be enforced, voluntarily if everyone is wise, but involuntarily if someone decides to manufacture MASTCHES in the locked shack full of dynamite that contains us all.
Noted physicist and astronomer Stephen Hawkins said that it is doubtful if the human race will last another thousand years because there are many accidents waiting to happen. Iran is the latest accident waiting to happen, I suppose. Why don’t we send d’glue to Iran! She can steal their nuclear secrets and capabilities in no time at all.
ha, ha, ha, ha, ok, alitaptap!!!!
First, I’m likely to believe reports that Iran is working on nuclear weapons despite their insistence that it is merely for energy generation purposes.
I believe that US, especially wih a president like Bush, being a nuclear weapons country, has no right to prevent other countries from having their own nuclear weapons.
Who are the Americans to say that they are more responsible than the others.
The ideal situation would be for no country to have nuclear weapons.
DJB,
Like Ellen, I do not think that the Americans have the right to develop nuclear energy and say others shouldn’t and force in everybody’s throat that they are more responsible than others! C’mon DJB, you know very well that the US posses more WMDs of nuclear provenance than all other major powers in this planet combined.
I mean, man, that’s outright being double standard!
America’s ever so righteous stand on the matter merely antagonizes the Iranians and at the rate the US is being so bellicose about it, they’re more likely to make the Iranians extremely confrontational than “negotiational”.
If this were the Lord of the Rings, the Bush would be Sauron, and Ahmadinejad would be Saruman.
But, Ellen, America has not threatened any country to obliterate them from this planet, unlike Iran, which declared its official policy to banish all of Israel from this world. So will we want Iran to have the bomb?
The issue of Iran and the nuclear bomb should be discussed
with reference to one of the cornerstones of international law, and that is the sanctity of treaties.It has often been
correctly pointed out that treaties and international law
exists for the protection of weak states like the Philippines. The big powers do not need treaties and international law to protect their interests.
Iran signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.She should
honor her commitments. The problem if we don’t insist on this approach should be apparent to all.China has an
understanding with all the claimants to the Spratleys to resolve the matter in a peaceful manner.China can declare
overnight that the agreements she signed is a mere scrap of
paper and use force to seize the whole area. She has the
military power to do so and we can not do anything about it.
That is why it is in our national interest to insist on
the sanctity of international agreements. In fact that principle is enshrined in our Constitution wherein we
recognize the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land.It is also
one of the basic doctrines of our foreign policy. We have
no choice on the matter.It is in our interest to maintain this principle for our survival.
I worried about Ahmadinejad. He wants to see Israel wiped off the face of this earth raw and said that the Holocaust never happened.
In Genesis, God looked over Adam and saw that it was good work. So God proceeded to create Eve.
After Alamogordo, Edward Teller saw the awesome destructive potential of the atom bomb and it was not good for man, and so he spearheaded the group of scientist to outlaw the bomb. That in essence is what Dubya is doing – outlawing nuclear proliferation. It is not a matter of rights of nations to own nuclear weapons nor US double standards. It is a matter of survival of the human race – preventing accidents to happen. If there be any re-run of Genesis, Adam will be a glowing mutant that will self-destruct ever so often … no chance of developing his ribs.
Firefly,
I believe Bush, being the more ‘polished’ of the two presidents (after all, Bush is American), should negotiate directly with Iran’s new chief, use his southern swagger and kind of sweet talk him – invite him to his ranch if necessary – into abandoning Iran’s nuclear proliferation ambitions.
Do you, my dear Friefly, believe that Bush can do this?
Or do you reckon, Bush wouldn’t do such a thing and instead, plan for the invasion of Iran (in secret with Dick C.) while he’s preparing for the greatest speech of his life entitled: “You’re either with me or against me.”?
Rest assured that I have no doubt that Bush is the more ‘polished’ and ‘honorable’ of the two men because I will never believe that Bush has ever thought of wiping out Israel even if for the sake of argument, it might have once crossed his mind to wipe out the other two Is – as in I(raq) and I(ran) – but only Dick Cheney will ever know.
Here’s the latest remark from Mahmoud Ahmadeinejad. Charming fellow, he:
What is it about this Iranian president and “removing Israel”? How do you “remove Israel” off the map, anyway?
If I were an out and out imperialist planning to rule the world, I would wish that atom bombs did not exist. The reason is that they ARE equalizers. But let’s carry this to its logical conclusion. Suppose that the US divides up its stock of nuclear weapons right now and gives them in equal shares to everybody. Say 200 nations and 20000 warheads in the US stockpile, that’s 100 10 megaton chunks of Armageddon each. How secure would such a world be? Remember “allowing” Iran to get the bomb will surely start an arms race in the region. With every country feeling like a superpower, I don’t suppose the “polish” of the US President will have much swagger to it then will it? Is that what we want. Remember this is the only “fair” situation there could be. If you ask why the US or UK or France or China have a “right” to the bomb, why would you limit it to them AND Iran?
Reductio ad absurdum?
Like what my dog did when he chewed my kids’ Atlas a couple of months ago. He simply gnawed the darn Middle East map converting the map(s) into tiny inconsequential ribbons, managed not only to ‘remove Israel off the map’ but also wiped out the entire South American continents including and a bit of Australia.
For a moment, I felt like putting him in the dish washer or in the oven but had second thoughts… coz of costly vet fees!
I am interested in a variation of the “one nation one bomb” theory.
Does anyone believe that the United Nations should be run on a
ONE NATION ONE VOTE principle?
If the Bush government was really serious about non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, they wouldn’t be spending their billions on occupying Iraq, which turns out to have none. It would instead invest at least part of that money on non-proliferation and anti-terrorism (e.g. port security, radiation detection, better intelligence, peacekeeping). As it is, Bush has so far been the best excuse for Islamic demagogues and Al Qaeda (just as Marcos was the best recruiter for the NPA). If you look at the map, it would not be rational for a Middle Eastern country to nuke Israel as they practically live next door to the Palestinian people whom they claim to fight for. Israel, with it’s arsenal of nuclear weapons however, is another matter.
DJB,
Why on earth do you think that if the US distributed its nuclear arsenal to every tom and dick and harry nation of the globe (I suppose you included RP in your top 200) will carry this entire discussion to a logical conclusion?
You surprise me – isn’t the discussion centered on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons?
cvj, didn’t understand your last point. I thought you folks are the ones pushing for proliferation. Do you mean that the US wants proliferation too since it is not serious and is spending its money toppling genocidal dictatorships? If SOME have it then ALL should have it, right? But not just Iran okay. You have to give it to every single country, otherwise, it’s UNFAIR?
What do you think ought to be? Who should have the Bomb again? If you say NONE, how do we get to NONE if you say ALL must have it while SOME do? It’s the fallacy of the excluded middle.
BTW, the US has been spending on many things, including Philippine port security. Last July the US Embassy and DOST announced the installation of a high tech “nuclear contraband detector” in the Port of Manila to help inspect the 7,000,000 cargo containers headed for the US homeland (with its 4 million Pinoys). Of course I suppose we should call this a stain on our sovereignty since it is such an insulting $5 million dollar piece of charity. It’s real sexy, though, some kind of fancy gamma ray neutron activation thingamagig. Operates 24/7/366
Anna,
Ms. Ellen said above: “I believe that US, especially wih a president like Bush, being a nuclear weapons country, has no right to prevent other countries from having their own nuclear weapons.”
Ergo, Iran has the right to own the bomb.
Ergo, so does every other country that wants it.
That’s proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Yeah I’m for total nonproliferation. You? (Note the ergos)
DJB,
Re: YOUR ONE NATION & ONE VOTE SCHEME
Let me ask you this: Do you believe that the Philippines represented today by Gloria Macapagal and her government of thieves should be allowed to have one vote too (with Davide as ambassador to the UN to boot)?
Remember: The Philippines under Gloria’s government today has no credibility whatsoever in the West – we’re not talking of the nation’s common tao (thank God, the Filipino people have got credibility) but the government that represents her is despised by the West including America.
Note: However, I shall be very, very frank with you DJB!
If I were to represent a Western nation in the UN, say tiny, ever so tiny Belgium (eeeeeeek!), I wouldn’t go for ONE NATION, ONE VOTE if you were to include the the Philippines in that ONE NATION, ONE VOTE scheme for as long as Gloria and her corrupt cronies are in RP government for the simple reason that Gloria’s taken the Philippine government down to become one of the most corrupt and least developed nation in the world today. I therefore believe that Gloria and her government should not be allowed to use that ONE NATION, ONE VOTE privilege to prevent her corrupt government from surviving a minute longer.
Question: Do you believe Philippines under corrupt Gloria is on equal footing with your beloved America as a developed nation and is entitled to join the club of ONE NATION, ONE VOTE?
Anna,
There’s nothing to worry about. The UN does NOT
DJB, you’re partly right. In a way, the US by its actions, show that it ‘wants’ proliferation because it is spending money and a large part of its military toppling genocidal dictatorships who *do not* have nuclear weapons. If proliferation is the number one focus, then they should have their priorities set and instead spent more on those ‘nuclear contraband detectors’.
BTW, what you suggest is not a bad idea. if the UN adopts a one nation one vote policy (with real power), the Philippines and every like minded people will split itself up into smaller independent units just to get more votes in the UN. This will result in the biggest population countries emerging from China, India, Indonesia with the most power and with the Philippines, with its 80 million people, having more proportional representation (assuming we vote as a bloc of course). That will be a big boost for federalism and would, on the whole, be a fairer arrangement.
Anna, There’s nothing to worry about, the UN does NOT operate on ONE NATION ONE VOTE at all. It is an OLIGARCHY of just 5 nations: US, UK, Russia, China, France.
As for the General Assembly, I do believe the Philippines still deserves its vote, for such things as the Red Cross, Unicef and many worthy international agencies, whose work I do respect and believe can continue no matter what the political arrangements are.
But the question I’ve asked is really this::: do you folks believe that there should be a DEMOCRACY AMONG NATIONS?
I personally believe in a DEMOCRACY AMONG PEOPLE.
It’s scary – if indeed nuclear weapons abound left, right and center in the planet including non-entity like Al Qaeda – to think that most governments adhere to Caesar’s dogma: “si vis pacem para bellum”.
Just ban nuclear weapons altogether!
CVJ–oK great let’s think about that some more. You are for ONE NATION ONE VOTE, for a Democracy among nations, where each is equal before the Law, and on all divisions of the house, carrying an equal weight as all the others.
First day: Tiny Cuba enters a resolution to divide up all the wealth in the world equally among nations on a per capita basis to really bring the peace of absolute numerical equality to all 6 billion human beings.
What do you think the vote tally will be on the second day?
How many members will leave on the third day?
One Nation One Vote?
DJB,
Democracy entails honoring the social contract.
If you are to go by that belief then the Philippines is not a democracy.
Probably the US and the rest of the G7 will leave first and we will impose sanctions accordingly.
CVJ,
DJB said, it’s all about democracy among people and not among nations so let’s talk about people – the resolution wouldn’t prosper even if tiny Cuba spearheaded it.
We don’t have to look beyond our nation’s vote; forget about the people of the G8 nations.
Look at it purely from the rich Pinoy oligarch’s point of view. Do you honetly think Danding Cojuangco, Fernando Zobel and George Ty (and others of course) allow their wealth to be distributed?
Lucio Tan will send his emissary in the person of Hilario Davide and put in a vote ‘on behalf’ of the Philippines with a NAY!
In other words, even tiny, poor Philippines would back out!
One Nation One Vote?
It’s absurd and you guys know it.
There is NO such a thing as Democracy among nation states. None. The UN is an oligarchy, plain and simple. Always has been from Day One.
Next question: How would you reform the United Nations? (No more One Nation One Vote Okay?)
Democracy among people, that we must be willing lay down our lives for, after the American military softens the ground first though, for our heads to rest on, if it has to come to that at all and THEY fail.
a de brux, in DJB’s make believe world of ‘one nation-one vote’, the Philippines would not be tiny, but yes, in the real world the oligarchy is a problem and a threat to democracy, that is why we have to fight for greater equality.
The American military definitely softened the ground with 180000 Iraqi dead. I’m not sure they were all that willing to lay down their lives in that way though.
Zombies were great last night at Araneta Coliseum. “…She’s not there.. tantirantarantirantaaaran.”
Many of the literati were there…Choy de Quiros, Pastor Boy Saycon, Virgilio Garcillano (short guy with a shaven head, won the autographed guitar in the dance contest with an outrageous number, no kidding, ask anyone who was there…)
alitaptap, just a minor correction, it was Oppenheimer who wanted to outlaw the A-bomb. Edward Teller went on to develop the H-bomb.
CVJ, DJB,
Agree!
I believe that there should be less economic inequality in the world. It is my conviction that if national economies are more or less homogenous, there would be less hatred among the inhabitants of our planet.
Sadly, I do not believe we will achieve equality – perhaps not during our(my) lifetime or perhaps never at all.
The G8 nations, they who have a lot lot more, should lead the way towards bridging the economic gap with the poorer nations if at all possible.
I also believe that charity begins at home but as we all know, the Philippines where we all come from, has not only NOT PROGRESSED an inch in that direction but has also constantly REGRESSED on account of one of the most corrupt leaders of modern times!
a de brux, sadly what you say is true, but all we can do is try. i’m glad you seem to be doing your part with ‘Students Without Borders’.
Thanks, CVJ but how did you know about Students Without Borders? It’s just been recently founded!
My son founded it last October and is currently its president – am helping him & his friends just like any mom would with little tasks like putting a bit of order in the association’s paperwork, advising them on them on a few things, etc.
Eto ang two centavos ko tungkol sa posters na gaya ni emilio. Para sa akin ang dapat na pagtrato sa kanila ay gaya ng ginawa ng mga posters sa unang response sa “Simula ng pagkakaisa” topic–completely na binale-wala. Sa palagay ko ay aksaya lang nga panahon na sagutin ang mga ganyang posts. Of course, preference ko lang ito, at wala akong nais na pigilin ang sinumang gustong sumagot kay emilio.
Gaya rin nating mga kumbinsido na dapat mapaalis si GMA sa trono, yung mga bilib sa kanya ay mahirap or almost impossible na makumbinsi na talikuran siya (at least habang nakaluklok siya). Lalo na yung mga nakikinabang sa pagkaka-upo ni GMA, babaligtad lang ang mga yan pag napatalsik na si GMA sa puwesto niya.
saw your name and affiliation in DJB’s ‘Petition to Save Philippine Children in Prison’, it was near mine.
Even if there is ONE NATION ONE VOTE, try to remember that every nation’s vote will be dictated by the powerful oligarch/elite of each and every nation. There is no such thing as voice of the people being represented in any deliberative body, even in the UN. In reality, the envoy represents his country’s powerful elite, never the majority of his country.
Oh yeah! OK!
I’ve suggested to ‘Students Without Borders’ (I’m one of its ‘honorary advisers’) to think about contributing to Father Shay Cullen’s efforts when the association has become steady.
To everybody!
Just browsed The Tribune headline, where the escaped Magdalo officers called for everybody to wear armbands as a sign of protest against this rotten administration. Think it’s an excellent idea; imagine millions of people wearing armbands everyday, just like back on 1986 where yellow armbands, headbands, pins, etc were being wear by evrybody. Just afraid Sec. Gonzalez will declare such thing as seditious!
How about it Ellen?
Anybody lead the way?
cvj – thanks for the ‘minor correction’. Cobwebs took over my history notes, hence am little bit fuzzy.
Anyways, the UN notwithstanding, it is still the law of the jungle out there, IMHO. The UN is merely a facade of civility among nations. In the final analysis, gunboat diplomacy always rears it ugly head. Hitler almost succeeded.
O by the way, mamselle de Brux, I don’t know how ‘polished’ is Dubya but I do know how ‘unpolished’ is d’glue clinging to power like a barnacle.
Hey dear Firefly,
Speaking of gunboat diplomacy (missile boat diplomacy would be more appropriate), do you know the most recent poster slogans that Northrop Grumann coined for the new aircraft carrier they built for the US Navy?
One aircraft carrier poster says: “90,000 TONS OF U.S. DIPLOMACY”
The other aircraft carrier poster says: “FOUR-AND-A-HALF ACRES OF U.S. REAL ESTATE ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, ANY PLACE!”
Mamselle de Brux, now we are talking realities – neither hype nor rehtoric. Chaiman Mao talks realities too: Power is at the barrel of the gun. Can you imagine Iran wielding nuclearhead diplomacy? You are not very far from Israel and if Israel goes … Eurpopean winter is not too far away!
Anyone has an idea what has happened to Malaya?
So? What could ANYONE do if a nation decided to nuke another?
To answer your question: I imagine it will be a worldwide holocaust!
What about you? Anyway, at the rate the environment is degrading what’s a year or two more before we all become history?
Anyway, what gave you the idea dear Alitaptap that I’m into nuclear proliferation? If you remember, earlier on I said BAN the darn nuclear weapons although I can’t imagine for the life of anyone here if that could be done.
By the way, if I recall, it’s only America that has ever nuked a nation so far… Can I safely assume that you, dear Firefly, are into nuke proliferation provided it’s good ol’ America that’s holding the warheads or am I off the mark?
Mamselle deBrux,(with a bow)
The issue here is FOR or AGAINST Iran attaining nuclear capability. It matters not who already got the nuclear warheads – nothing we can do about that, except hope that no madman ever gets to the trigger. While there is time to dissuage Iran to forego its nuclear ambition, it would be foolhardy to allow the Persian madman to continue his course. NATO is headquarterd in your city- Brussels, and I commend the organization for taking a definitive stand against Iran.
Sorry, wrong place yung post ko dito about emilio. Dapat sa “Hindi mailigtas ng Chacha si Gloria.”
Hi, Tomas,
What’s problem with Malaya?
The name malaya.com.ph has expired.
:: Renew malaya.com.ph
If you are the owner of malaya.com.ph, renew it now to restore mail and web services. If this domain is not renewed soon, it will become available for registration on a first-paid first-served basis. Log-in using the email address you used to register this domain. If you need to update the email address used to register this domain, fill up the necessary documents or contact dotPH for assistance.
:: Waitlist is full
Someone has already waitlisted malaya.com.ph. Only one Waitlist reservation is allowed per domain.
http://www.domains.ph
Above is what I have been getting when I try to go to Malaya.
Alitaptap, getting Iran to comply with non-proliferation is the job of the IAEA and the UN Security Council. No more unilateral/coalition of the willing initiatives like in Iraq which got us into such a weak strategic position in the first place. The thing to remember is that Iran is *not* ruled by a madman. Ahmadinejad, the president is not the most powerful official, rather there is a council of Ayatollahs that make the final decision. Probably Iran is just playing a ‘good-cop/bad-cop’ routine. It also pays to remember that Tehran is populated by human beings like you and me.
One nation, One vote? Ok, send the liar, the cheater, and the thief if Bush wants to win. I am very sure Bush will get all the votes. Paging Garci!!!
cvj , your point is well taken. Unfortunately IAEA has no backbone or perhaps structured to be just that – submissive to the host country. Now there no more monitoring devices to keep track of nuclear activity in Iran.
No sane man would endeavor to erase Israel from the map. Hitler endeavored to eliminate the jews to cleanse the fatherland. That is madness. And you call Ahmadinejad SANE?
Of course Tehran is teeming with people. There were also tens of thousands of people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
The characterization of the IAEA as being submissive has no basis in fact. Anyway, the IAEA’s backbone is the UN Security Council, acting as a *whole*. This should not be politicized to suit Israel’s and the Bush Government’s agenda. In due time, the governing structure (headed by Iran’s Supreme leader, Khamanei) will rein in Ahmadinejad. Just like in Iraq (before the US invaded), there is a sizable chunk of the population that is outward looking and secular. Nuking Tehran because it happens to be led by Ahmadinejad is like nuking Manila because we happen to be led by GMA. Ahmadinejad is just about as sane as Bush.
btw, malaya’s online edition is back. there was a problem with our domain earlier. but it’s ok now.
Ellen,
Could you post the exact new link to Malaya…it’s 6:39pm…still getting a domain error contact owner message.
Please try again. I’m told it’s now okay.
CVJ, Anna de Brux–
I hope we all accept the fact that there is truly NO DEMOCRACY among nation-states. There is no EQUALITY as such among nations, that is why the UN does not in effect operate under the principle of ONE NATION, ONE VOTE. The UN is an oligarcy of five because there is an implicit understanding that nations were not created equal under God. Only human beings have that distinction. Viewed like this, I see that the existence of the nation-states as themselves the problem, because in most cases, they ARE run by scoundrels or madmen, like us. There is simply no sense in which America is equal to Zambia, nor China to Cuba. It would be the height of suicidal foolishness to adopt ONE NATION ONE VOTE in the UN.
But how to reform the UN. Or should it be junked altogether?
Dean, CVJ,
Am not for junking the UN.
As to how to reform the UN: I will think about it – gotta prepare now for Valentine’s dinner outing with my better half (yes, with my BETTER half!)
Hope you have a grand St Valentine’s day too!
DJB, I agree with your description above that there is no democracy among nation states and the concept of one nation-one vote is a moot point. Even in the European Union which has fewer countries as its members, such a system is proving cumbersome. But why are we having this discussion about one nation one vote anyway?
Why not let Gloria and her alipores like Michael
Defensor, FAt Guy Arroyo kasama si Garci send to IRAN to steal the secret nuclear program. Di b si Defensor at Bunye ang nag rescue operation sa witness ni Ping Lacson laban kay Jose Pidal. Maging sila magnakaw pati kaluluwa ni Juan de la Cruz ninanakw pa.
Urgie,
Re: Your “Why not let Gloria and her alipores like Michael
Defensor, FAt Guy Arroyo kasama si Garci send to IRAN to steal the secret nuclear program.”
What if they succeed? RP will be facing the wrath of Uncle Sam Dubya and before you know it, the US of A’s armagedon carrying nuclear ship will be on Manila bay pounding Manila to flatten it worse than flattened Warsaw of WWII fame!
Well, ok, ok… another scenario is that Uncle Sam might just exercise nuclear restraint and instead, ‘interrogate’ Gloria and her kidnapping expert Defensor. Problem is these two punggoks will weave a blarney yarn – they will lie like they’ve never lied before and if cornered, with a tear in their eyes say, “I’m sorry…, it was a lapse in judgement”.
Hah! Talo nila nagyon ang US of A!
“On the evening of Jan. 31, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw held a ministerial dinner at his official residence in London, where he played the instrumental role of mediating an agreement among his American, French, Russian, and Chinese counterparts that would open the way to bringing the Iranian nuclear issue to the United Nations Security Council. This would be a decisive step in the drive for a near-term U.S. military attack on Iran.
Within a few hours, on the morning of Feb. 1, leading dailies in France, Italy, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, and the British-government-owned BBC-Online, published a series of highly inflammatory cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed…”
“Historically the British elite have used a divide-and-conquer strategy, especially in the Middle East. They are misusing this crisis to promote their agenda. The British are using their influence with Cheney and the neo-cons on the one side, and the Muslim Brotherhood on the other, to get a new war with Iran. It is time to listen to the wise words of Lyndon LaRouche so that we can stop being manipulated.”
– http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2006/3307cartoons_war.html
Anino,
I don’t like the UK’s current Labour government; matter of fact, I despise Tony Blair, his chancellor Gordon Brown, etc. but I despise Jack Straw the least. Straw is one member of this Labour government who’s tried his damnest to do a proper job.
Here’s a suggestion: Do not take everything Lyndon Larouche says as biblical truth.
The Western European press the media at large, if indeed they re-published those cartoons merely invoked their right to free speech. Their act had nothing to do with the four nations’ decision to mediate in the looming US-Iran nuclear crisis. Straw and the British cannot be accused of treachery in what happened afterwards or what the press decided to do with the cartoons thereafter.
BBC is perhaps a UK state-owned, but it is one of the FREEST media (all 4 BBC channels) we have in the world; it practices its right to freedom of the press with as much aplomb and virulence, if not more, as any other privately-owned broadcasting network, no matter the party in power.
cvj–It all has to do with the United Nations, which is often mistaken for a democracy. I think that if One Nation One Vote was the right way for humanity to go it would also mean ONE NATION ONE BOMB (total nuclear proliferation) is also the right way to go.
The reason they are both wrong is the same: nations are “NOT created equal under God.” This is not meant to be a provocative statement, but a statement of historical and incidental fact that reflects nothing about the superiority of races or anything else.
The inequality just has to do with age and time, like the inequality between us and our grandparents.
One Nation, One Vote?
One Nation, One Bomb?
NO!
Yeah, DJB. Let’s just keep the N bomb in the hands of the whites.
a de brux,
Thank you for the suggestion. You’re right we should not accept anybody’s view as the biblical truth. Afterall, even the bible does not contain the WHOLE TRUTH.
In fairness to Larouche, he intelligently forecasted the Asian Financial Crisis 25 years before it happened – which was just a taste to a worldwide financial collapse. The war on Iraq and impending war on Iran, Syria, North Korea were divulged long before Bush was elected into office. His advocacy for Classical Ideas and Science as the foundation for good governance can easily be appreciated if one has the wisdom. His Executive Intelligence Review is read by world leaders aside from the regular economists, financial gurus…, etc.
If these are not enough, his advocacy for the return to the Bretton Woods Agreement of Fixed Exchange Rate for those who can’t survive without capitalism and the revival of the Treaty of Wesphalia where “nation-states are working for the advantage of the other” are most notable.
I am saying these from the viewpoint of being not a member of any organization, but of ordinary truth-seeker.
How can you ever say that a state-owned entity is not bias to the state’s controlling interests? C’mon, you can do better than that, i’m sure.
Party affiliation is immaterial once the interest of the mutual Master is at stake.
“… just keep the N bomb in the hands of the whites.”
What are you thinking? Who are you representing?
Nakakatakot ang ganyang point of view.
Not very far from Iran, Pakistan has a nuclear bomb. But the United states is good to Musharaff. Because they need him in their global agenda.
That is what I find hypocritical about the U.S. protests, as well as that of other countries, in the possibility that Iran is building its capability to produce nuclear weapons.
Nuclear weapons are a danger to the world. it is not only Iran that should not possess it. Nobody should. There should be no nuclear weapons.
Ellen,
I agree with you that there should be no nuclear weapons. It is a comforting thought that swords should be converted to plowshares… BUT that is an impossibility – turning back the nuclear clock. Nations can fight each other to slow it down, and that’s about all that can be done. The clock will keep on ticking.Man is the only creature that has the capacity and inclination to eliminate his own specie. Man is powerless to stop the accident waiting to happen.
I find it hard to reconcile the fact that the Four Major Arms Suppliers in the world – USA, FRANCE, RUSSIA, CHINA sit permanently at the UN Security Council.
There’s hope, Alitaptap, if the people of these countries would elect the Right Leaders, and would give in to the wishes of mortals like Ellen.
Anino,
Re: “How can you ever say that a state-owned entity is not bias to the state’s controlling interests? C’mon, you can do better than that, i’m sure.”
Amazing isn’t it? Totally in opposition to how you do things in ‘undemocratic’ Philippines?
I believe that while you must look at BBC as state owned, you must do so but from the people’s point of view.
The government in power has virtually NO say in the press contents of the BBC; the Labour government, for instance, may try to influence the director or the anchorman to tilt an ‘attack’, kind of soften a political stance but legally, the government cannot do that and won’t do anything of the sort (a member of the government will try) but if he is found out, the fellow is in serious trouble – the BRITISH MEDIA is one of the most vicious media in the world!
On paper, BBC is state-owned but in reality it is the BRITISH POPULATION that PAYS for the EXISTENCE of BBC; the British taxpayers and the TV taxes that each TV owner pays keep it going. There are no commercials on any of the 4 channels. The BBC therefore does not have to kowtow to the whims of a private advertiser, etc.
If at all, BBC will be neutral if political parties start shooting each other but will not spare an erring member of government from political exposés. BBC represents the freedom of speech of the British people, no government can tell it to curtail that freedom just because it happens to be in power at the time. It will be extremely dangerous for any member of government to adopt that tack!
I recommend you watch some of the political talk programmes on any of the 4 BBC channels and you will be surprised how hardhitting the interviewees could be against government and against the monarchy – there is no censorship save perhaps for the four-letter word! Watch the political humoristic/satirical shows – you will find the anchorperson will not spare a member of government from hardhitting political questions that the public (the people that really own BBC) want answered.
Anino, we are not in the Philippines here and we have a different interpretation of state-ownership particularly when it comes to the BBC (same case with French channels 2 & 3)! State-owned entities are owned by the taxpayers.
I can guarantee you that we don’t take our rights lightly here. The government or political party in power knows that very well. Remember what the British did to Thatcher, the political and economic saviour of Britain of the 70s? She was kicked out most appalingly and in the most humiliating fashion when we thought she was starting to take the people’s will for granted!
UK ain’t the Philippines.
Anino,
“… just keep the N bomb in the hands of the whites.”
I was reacting sarcastically to DJB’s comment.
Cool!
BBC practices the dictum that the government is the people. So their loyalty is to the people and not to the officials of the government.
That should be the case in our government-owned and sequestered media. But alas! this is the Philippines where government employees think it’s whoever sits in Malacanang who pays their salaries.
That’s true Ellen.
It is unfortunate that our common tao in the Philippines have not fully grasped the real meaning of democracy. That they, the people hold the life and death fate of their government in their hands.
One would think that Edsa I was merely a quirk of fate…a Filipino fiesta of sorts.
Fundamentally, religion – the Philippine Catholic church and religious meddlers – share a great deal of the blame.
Thank you for educating me, M’ A de Brux. Really it still a long way to go for us here. Buti ka pa dyan kahit di mag-aircon, malamig.
Am flattered Anino…
I believe the Philippines has what it takes to get cracking – get moving towards real democracy.
It has an educated population, hardworking by nature, patient and persevering – what it lacks is the audacity to go the extra mile.
We like to say that a nation deserves the government it elects. And really, when you come down to it – the saying is almost true.
I believe that if the nation believes that the government doesn’t deserve a people’s mandate, then they must exercise the right to kick it out regardless of political or religious beliefs. But the people – everyone – must work hard to obtain that right to sanction government when it no longer enjoys their trust. The people must no just sit back, hoping that things will work out; must not allow someone else to use that right in his place.
The people must stop this cycle of subservience to someone else, i.e., the elite, the more educated, the noble as in the clergy, just because the other has a ‘better’ station in life. There is no dignity in that exercise.
The people must take part in nation building, must confront the issues head on to realize their ambition of a better life – the government they put in power cannot do that all on its own, particularly when that government has breached the constitution that is the backbone of the nation.
It will take a great deal of moral courage and great audacity to do that but it’s got to be done and what better time than to start today?
PS: Nag snow dito noong makalawa – maganda pero I miss the sun and warmth of the beaches in Pinas din. Pag nasa Pinas ako, ayaw ko ng aircon. Hindi na ako used to aircon! Hehehe!
DJB, i agree that what you say is a fact of life. States can be objectively classified as to the level of threat they pose. Some countries like India, Pakistan and North Korea have enough nuclear weaponry to pose a threat to cities and other countries. Some, like the US, Russia and maybe Israel, are capable of laying waste to the entire planet. Both threats have to be addressed.