xpost: Worried Yet? Saudis Prepare for "Sudden Nuclear Hazards" After Cheney Visit

[bananas]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3051350

I. One Tick Closer to Midnight

Last Friday, Dick Cheney was in Saudi Arabia for high-level meetings with the Saudi king and his ministers. On Saturday, it was revealed that the Saudi Shura Council -- the elite group that implements the decisions of the autocratic inner circle -- is preparing "national plans to deal with any sudden nuclear and radioactive hazards that may affect the kingdom following experts' warnings of possible attacks on Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactors," one of the kingdom's leading newspapers, Okaz, reports. The German-based dpa news service relayed the paper's story.

<snip>

[zazen]

1. is there anything to be gained by brinksmanship?

<http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/6164>

I believe these maniacs are capable of anything, as long as they think it won't jeapordize their or their cronies' wealth. But the blogger below plausibly argues that Saudi Arabia would never leak this accidentally and has been colluding in this psychological brinksmanship for a while. What I don't understand is, what is the brinksmanship for? What possible concessions are we after from Iran? It doesn't look like Ahmedenijad (sp) is going to be dislodged anytime soon. Are we threatening the world with our military might so that they don't all dump the dollar? I just don't get it.

from a blogger there:

"Ok... first of all if the Saudi Shura Council were planning to discuss "secretly" and deal with "sudden nuclear hazard"..., why did the tightly controlled Kingdom so quickly leak the news?

Chris Floyd's blog claims that pursuant to Dick Cheney's meeting last Friday with the Saudi King, " it was revealed that the Saudi Shura Council -- the elite group that implements the decisions of the autocratic inner circle -- is preparing "national plans to deal with any sudden nuclear and radioactive hazards that may affect the kingdom following experts' warnings of possible attacks on Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactors," one of the kingdom's leading newspapers, Okaz, reports. The German-based dpa news service relayed the paper's story."

Chris Floyd continues to say that "The story by Okaz -- which would not have appeared in the tightly controlled dictatorship without approval from the top -is yet another, very weighty piece of evidence laid in the scales toward a new, horrendous conflict."

I usually like Chris Floyd's blog, but I didn't like the "alarm bells" that it was ringing on account of the above Saudi news. Saudi Arabia is a staunch Bush ally and has been leading the US's 'psychological' war in the Middle East... much like Israel actually. Saudi Arabia has actively been selling the US/Israeli case against Iran... and Saudi Arabia has actively participated in US/israel incitement of political conflict in Lebanon between Muslims & Muslims and Muslims and Christians. In short Saudi Arabia has been playing along the US/Israeli axis, spreading lies and participating in a war on many non physical levels against Iran. Why shouldn't Saudi Arabia today help its close ally further escalate its threat level in the Middle East as he seems to be able to do nothing else? Isn't Saudi Arabia boycotting at presidential level the coming Arab League meeting in Syria because of the United States and Israel at the expense of the people of the Middle East? Why wouldn't Saudi Arabia join the US in a little more 'threat escalation'?


The US navy has been stuck in the Persian Gulf for years now... while George Bush has been threatening and threatening with an endless war of words for years now; but he hasn't attacked... although there is no doubt that the US has the capacity to attack.

The question is: does the US have the capacity to withdraw without major losses? Can the US handle the inevitable losses it would incur? What would happen to the price of oil once the first bullet of the Iran war is shot? Can the US afford the rise in price? Of course the US might well be 'duped' into the war by the Israeli vultures who are hoping for a false flag, but the US has frankly made Israel's role very easy.

I think that this is psychological war.. and I still hang on to my theory that there will be no war with Iran... though I have to admit that things are not looking too good for my theory."

[OKIsItJustMe]

3. There may be

(President) Kennedy is generally praised for during the "Cuban missile crisis" (actions which must be considered "brinksmanship.)

[tinrobot]

10. An election, perhaps.

If this happens, I suspect it will happen right before the election in an effort to make McCain look strong.

[jpak]

2. Cheney = ignorant ani-nuke cultist luddite

:evilgrin:

[NNadir]

4. Well, he certainly wouldn't have gotten very far with his "mushroom cloud" rhetoric with an educated

public.

He's about as hallucinatory as the anti-nuke cult, on whose ignorance he heavily relied.

[jpak]

8. Why does Cheney hate nuclear power???

:D

[NNadir]

12. Cheney couldn't care less about nuclear power. His schtick however depended on nuclear ignorance.

No nuclear ignorance, no Niger uranium/mushroom cloud scare.

Frankly I, like Hans Blix and Mohammed ElBaradei, knew the claim was bogus by inspection.

The anti-nuke cult, on the other hand, ramped the whole thing up.

[losthills]

9. Huh?

You do know that Haliburton is a nuclear energy contractor and that Chaney is a nuclear energy promoter , don't you?

http://commondreams.org/headlines01/0502-01.htm

Published on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 in the Guardian of London
Going Backwards
Cheney Promises Big US Nuclear Power Expansion
by Martin Kettle in Washington, Paul Brown and Mark Milner

Vice-President Dick Cheney threw away 20 years of environmental caution yesterday when he announced that the US would build a new generation of nuclear power plants in the government's effort to overcome a national energy shortage.
The US rejected nuclear power after the major accident at Three Mile Island in 1979. It has not built a single new nuclear plant since then, although the industry still produces a fifth of its electricity.

Apart from the fear of an accident, reinforced by Chernobyl in 1986, the industry has been dogged by the problem of dealing with spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste.
.....

Vice-president Dick Cheney dismissed on Monday night the idea of "conserving or rationing" as 1970s-era solutions to the US's energy shortages.

In a speech in Toronto, Mr Cheney said that "conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy.

He rejected energy conservation and renewable energy sources as major alternatives, promoting nuclear power as good for the environment since it emitted few greenhouse gases, ignoring the problems of nuclear waste disposal.
......

Sounds to me like the nuclear power proseletizers in this group are the ones who have the most in common with Shotgun Dick....



Attempts to create a long-term depository for thousands of spent fuel rods and the accumulated waste of 50 years have failed, in both the US and Britain.

[pscot]

5. Anyone know what Iran could do to retaliate?

We have a quarter of our navy deployed along Iran's coastline. Do they have the rockets to inflict major damage on our fleet? Or is this operation completely risk free?

[jimlup]

6. Other pieces of the puzzle?

1. US deploys nuclear sub to the Persian Gulf:

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=102736

2. US moves to isolate Iranian banks:

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16962

3. The military is ratcheting up the usual rhetoric of Iranian interference in US Occupied Iraq:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7311565.stm

Seems like it fits but an attack would be a major gamble. I don't believe they are that desperate, I'm hoping this is just a ratcheting up of the threat but I could wrong. The clowns in the White House are capable of pretty much anything so all bets are off.

[losthills]

7. The thing that really trips me out about Bush and Cheney

is that they don't seem to realize that they are about to be leaving office soon. Or that congress won't go along with another war, and the citizens won't support one. Are they completely divorced from reality, or are they just jerking everybody's chains and laughing about it behind our backs.....?

[tinrobot]

11. They don't care about Congress or the citizens.

War in Iran means higher oil prices and more military contracts. Big oil and big defense are the only two groups that they care about.

Besides, Bush Sr invaded Somalia a month before he left office... I'm sure Bush Jr will want to top his dad.