Reader comment on: The Attack on Syria's al-Kibar Nuclear Facility
in response to reader comment: Toda Raba!!!
Submitted by peter brown (United States), Jun 2, 2012 18:31
Ihave read the Ron Rosenbaum book, and now I see this site and all I can think is that the next attacke by the allied andti Muslim group is going to be over nuclear threats and evidence. This will be a shortsighted policy in the long run because we demonstrated by our illicit attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan that a destabilized Middle East does not necessarily promote the stop of nuclear research. The technology to creat nuclear weapons is fairly simple and well nderstood, certainly at the level of competence of a highly motivated gradute student. So it seems that the way to avoid the inevitable would be to foster cooperation between nuclear powers and aspiring nuclear powers to ensure devlopment of nuclear energy and other forms of energy. This would pacify those countries who are looking at the end of their petroleum resources and secure for them the knowledge that they will not end up like Mexico as their petroleum resources slowly dwindle on the world markets.
It is also useful to point out the shining hypocrisy of Israel as they dictate nuclear policy in their region while in full posession of a 200 missile arsenal that has never been inventoried or reviewed by the UN. They have put the rest of the world in the position of having to carpet bomb their country to do the same thing as they have done to syria.
I noted with interest that Ron's book recoiled in horror at the thought of a second genocide to which Israel would have no option except to go to a doomsday scenario using the dolphin submarine fleet. We must be etrnally gratedul that other tribes facing extermination have not had that option and that an invasion of Ugandan would not destro the world in retaliation for the ROW not reacting to the destruction of their tribe.
Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. This site reserves the right to reject anything found to be objectionable.
Other reader comments on this item
Comment on this item