U.S. Won't Report South Korea to U.N. for Nuclear Tests

While doing research on uranium enrichment activities of countries and states other than Iran I came around the following article:

By Dafna Linzer and Anthony Faiola
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, November 25, 2004; Page A19

The Bush administration has decided against moving to report South Korea to the U.N. Security Council today for conducting secret nuclear experiments four years ago, U.S. officials said.

The decision, made during a phone call between Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and his designated successor, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, curtailed a proposal by some in the administration who wanted to confront the Seoul government today when the International Atomic Energy Agency opens its meeting in Vienna. Those officials had argued that reporting South Korea to the Security Council would encourage allies to take the same path later with Iran, which the administration alleges is conducting a nuclear weapons program.

Washington Post

So actually the Bush Administration measures by two standards. Firstly, of all there's no proof Iran is developing uranium in order to build a nuclear weapon. Secondly, both countries did sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which makes me wonder why Iran should get a unique and different treatment than others?

Basically, there's no international organization deciding whether actions should be taken against a specific country or rogue state, it's the Bush Administration that decides what to happen. No news, but neither a justifiable reason for a possible attack on a country.

South Korea isn't threatening to take over the planet. It isn't threatening to wipe out people simply because they worship God differently than they do.

While it may be a violation and probably should have been reported ... I don't care that it wasn't. South Korea isn't whacked like North Korea or Iran.

As far as proof that Iran is going to use their nuclear capabilities for weapons .. of course they are. Their glorious leader has said he intends to wipe entire countries off the face of the planet and he holds strange operas with dancers carrying yellow cake. Have you seen those? VERY strange.

Iran using their nuclear capabilities in nuclear weapons is just common sense.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
South Korea isn't threatening to take over the planet. It isn't threatening to wipe out people simply because they worship God differently than they do.

While it may be a violation and probably should have been reported ... I don't care that it wasn't. South Korea isn't whacked like North Korea or Iran.

As far as proof that Iran is going to use their nuclear capabilities for weapons .. of course they are. Their glorious leader has said he intends to wipe entire countries off the face of the planet and he holds strange operas with dancers carrying yellow cake. Have you seen those? VERY strange.

Iran using their nuclear capabilities in nuclear weapons is just common sense.

Exactly. South Korea doesn't talk tough and launch missiles to intimidate and threaten and they don't have some nut job running their country. They're not an emerging threat. They also have every right to conduct such tests since their neighbors to the north have and will continue to conduct the same testing. The north has not been shy about threatening South Korea. South Korea can't just sit around and not develop some form of retaliation if the north does decide to attack.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
South Korea isn't threatening to take over the planet. It isn't threatening to wipe out people simply because they worship God differently than they do.

While it may be a violation and probably should have been reported ... I don't care that it wasn't. South Korea isn't whacked like North Korea or Iran.

As far as proof that Iran is going to use their nuclear capabilities for weapons .. of course they are. Their glorious leader has said he intends to wipe entire countries off the face of the planet and he holds strange operas with dancers carrying yellow cake. Have you seen those? VERY strange.

Iran using their nuclear capabilities in nuclear weapons is just common sense.

While I am not a champion of Ahmedinejad and whatever statements he has made, it's no reason to punish one country while another country can get away with it. Both countries violated international laws, both countries should have been taken to the Security Council, not solely Iran.

To get back on your ''wipe off the map statement'', I don't read Persian and I am not sure whether he said it like that. Some claim he said that Israel should be wiped off the map while others say the following:

I read again in this morning's Boston Globe a matter of fact reference to Iran's threat to "wipe Israel off the map." This echoes the repeated allegation by President Bush and other top administration officials that Iran's President Ahmadinejad has issued such a call. "We are talking about a specific threat on a partner of the U.S. and Germany," Bush told the German newspaper Bild last week. But is this not just more neo-con disinformation, designed to inspire fear that Iran's nuclear program, which heads the long list of Washington's charges against Iran, is really designed to annihilate Israel?

It turns out that Ahmadinejad never said what is being routinely attributed to him. Juan Cole, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at University of Michigan who reads Persian, explains that he actually stated (quoting the late Ayatollah Khomeini): "The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] from the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad)."

Now, some might say, "So he didn't say, 'wipe off the map,' he said 'erase from the page.' What's the difference? Anyway he's saying he wants to get rid of Israel." But Cole explains why the mistranslation significantly distorts the Iranian leader's words. "Ahmadinejad was not making a threat, he was quoting a saying of Khomeini and urging that pro-Palestinian activists in Iran not give up hope -- that the occupation of Jerusalem was no more a continued inevitability than had been the hegemony of the Shah's government. Whatever this quotation from a decades-old speech of Khomeini may have meant, Ahmadinejad did not say that 'Israel must be wiped off the map' with the implication that phrase has of Nazi-style extermination of a people. He said that the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the page of time."

Source

In whichever way you interpreted his statement, I am more or less convinced Iran has no plans to wipe Israel off the map, as of the following reasons:

-Why wouldn't Iran buy plutonium on the black market, as I stated in other threads, there's a hell of a lot missing, stolen from legal nuclear facilities. The advantage is that a country can secretly develop an arsenal, in contrast to Iran's current situation and it's much faster.
-An attack on Israel would mean total self destruction, if that's Iran's purpose, why would they sign major (25 years) contracts with China, India and other countries for crude oil deliveries?

In my opinion, Iran wants to strengthen both its political and military position throughout the Middle East region and internationally. In the long term they might use their program to bolster their (already existing?) nuclear arsenal. But actually using their weapons... I'm not too sure of that.

Besides, why is a (loose) statement any worse than the killings of hundreds Lebanese civillians? (again I don't agree with Ahmedinejad's statement on Israel).





[edit on 17-9-2006 by Mdv2]

Being we hold a large sway in south korea, and south korea hasnt threatened to wipe out one of our closest allies in our money making pig pen, i think there's No gain, or no increase in prosperity if they go down the road of nuclear debates.

In a perfect world, anyone should be able to do anything.
But its not a perfect world, and we have mad men who would enjoy watching certain races suffer and die horrible deaths.

For cultural, economic and trade reasons there's nothing about south korea that needs to be reported.

I hate bush and his strategies too, but poking at him simply because his government choses not to take EVERY country to the security council is clutching.

Originally posted by Mdv2
So actually the Bush Administration measures by two standards.

Well, one really. SK ain't going to be hitting the US with nukes, nor is it ruled by an insane dicatator like NK or religious fanatics, like Iran.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Mdv2
So actually the Bush Administration measures by two standards.

Well, one really. SK ain't going to be hitting the US with nukes, nor is it ruled by an insane dicatator like NK or religious fanatics, like Iran.

Originally posted by Mdv2

How CIA "protected" A.Q. Khan

Hasan Suroor

He was caught stealing designs from a Dutch uranium plant. Former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers in a radio programme says the CIA saved Khan from going to prison.

LONDON: In a disclosure that is likely to embarrass American authorities, the former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers has revealed how the CIA protected the controversial Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan and saved him from going to prison after he was caught stealing secret designs from a Dutch uranium plant in 1975.

Mr. Lubbers, who was Minister of Economic Affairs at the time, told a Dutch radio station on Tuesday that because of pressure from the CIA no action was taken against Dr. Khan and he was quietly allowed to return to Pakistan.

Hindu -Full article

I have the idea this story is not known to most among us. For the records, it's an interesting story, as Khan is suspected of having sold nuclear-weapons technology to - rogue states, such as Iran, North Korea and Lybia.

While I agree that North Korea does form a threat to their citizens, South Korea and the US, there's no justifiable reason to treat Iran differently from other countries. In addition, your argument that Iranians are ''religious fanatics'' is a pretty weak one to support your statement that Iran should be punished in contrast to others.

With respsect this is a little two faced isn't it?
I mean the US has no qualms about reporting possible enemies yet turns a blind eye to "Allies"? Isnt this how we got into this mess with alquida and most terrorist groups?

Originally posted by Mdv2

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Mdv2
So actually the Bush Administration measures by two standards.

Well, one really. SK ain't going to be hitting the US with nukes, nor is it ruled by an insane dicatator like NK or religious fanatics, like Iran.

Originally posted by Mdv2

How CIA "protected" A.Q. Khan

Hasan Suroor

He was caught stealing designs from a Dutch uranium plant. Former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers in a radio programme says the CIA saved Khan from going to prison.

LONDON: In a disclosure that is likely to embarrass American authorities, the former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers has revealed how the CIA protected the controversial Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan and saved him from going to prison after he was caught stealing secret designs from a Dutch uranium plant in 1975.

Mr. Lubbers, who was Minister of Economic Affairs at the time, told a Dutch radio station on Tuesday that because of pressure from the CIA no action was taken against Dr. Khan and he was quietly allowed to return to Pakistan.

Hindu -Full article

I have the idea this story is not known to most among us. For the records, it's an interesting story, as Khan is suspected of having sold nuclear-weapons technology to - rogue states, such as Iran, North Korea and Lybia.

While I agree that North Korea does form a threat to their citizens, South Korea and the US, there's no justifiable reason to treat Iran differently from other countries. In addition, your argument that Iranians are ''religious fanatics'' is a pretty weak one to support your statement that Iran should be punished in contrast to others.

True but this doesn't mean Iran shouldn't be punished. They should both be punished equally. I personally am wondering why we are spending so much time on Iran, who we assume doesn't have a nuclear weapon YET, when North Korea is preparing to test one. It's stupid if you ask me. Then again, considering we have Bush and Cheney running things, Iran does have more oil than North Korea.