Skip

Second verse, same as the first!
March 14, 2006 10:56 AM   Subscribe


 
You've got to be kidding me....
posted by malaprohibita at 10:58 AM on March 14, 2006


well here we go again
posted by Elim at 10:59 AM on March 14, 2006


he said, but "that is not to say [uranium transfers to Tehran] couldn't happen in the future."
WTF?
posted by matkline at 10:59 AM on March 14, 2006


...twice as loud, and twice as worse!
posted by eriko at 10:59 AM on March 14, 2006


Washington Times.
posted by psmealey at 11:03 AM on March 14, 2006


I appreciate the clever editorializing of the FPP, but does this really have to be an elaborate American plot to discredit Venezuela in preperation? It is (a) feasible that this might occur given the ties between Venezuela and Iran and (b) clear that the article is highly speculative, ala the official State Department statement, "We are aware of reports of possible Iranian exploitation of Venezuelan uranium, but we see no commercial uranium activities in Venezuela."

[ducks]
posted by blahblahblah at 11:04 AM on March 14, 2006


Ooh, how convenient!
posted by carter at 11:05 AM on March 14, 2006


Guys, it's the Washington Times. Even most of the right wingers think they're looney.
posted by unreason at 11:05 AM on March 14, 2006


And we have the forged documents to prove it!
posted by telstar at 11:11 AM on March 14, 2006


I call bullshit
posted by mert at 11:11 AM on March 14, 2006


From the article:

"Retired Venezuelan Vice Adm. Jose Rafael Huizi-Clavier said the mining arrangements negotiated last month with Iran are broad and unspecific and could easily include uranium."

Hey, they've found their new Chalabi!

This is tremendously flimsy "evidence," much much flimsier even than the Iraq claims.

Way to go, Moonies, you get a gold star for today for your efforts to help justify another war! :)

You freaks.
posted by zoogleplex at 11:13 AM on March 14, 2006


As ambiguous as I am on Chavez, he is cozy with Iran. Unlike the Niger-Iraq "connection," this one is actually plausible.
posted by jefgodesky at 11:17 AM on March 14, 2006


It is my understanding that zoogleplex's wife works for the CIA. I'm just sayin'.
posted by justkevin at 11:17 AM on March 14, 2006


Wow, go after Chavez AND Iran. Killing two birds with one stone.
posted by SirOmega at 11:21 AM on March 14, 2006


Wow, she's under such deep cover that I wasn't even aware that I was married!!

Hey wait... how come I'm not getting half her income??!? CIA operatives make scary hazard pay money! I could live in a much better place!!

And the gadgets... I want the gadgets. :)
posted by zoogleplex at 11:24 AM on March 14, 2006


Let them eat yellowcake!
posted by Balisong at 11:30 AM on March 14, 2006


It is my understanding that zoogleplex's wife works for the CIA. I'm just sayin'.

See, as long as you don't actually officially know that, it's legal to say so!
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:32 AM on March 14, 2006


"Wow, go after Chavez AND Iran. Killing two birds with one stone."

And when the stuff is shipped on a North Korean freighter ... TRIFECTA.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 11:36 AM on March 14, 2006


Venezuela: Iran’s Best Friend?
posted by loquax at 11:38 AM on March 14, 2006


Are we looking at US involvement in a south american war (I mean, overtly this time)? Atleast it wouldn't be as far to travel and most americans already understand spanish.
posted by blue_beetle at 11:40 AM on March 14, 2006


Gosh, I hope someone's taking care of any kids I haven't been "need to know" about...
posted by zoogleplex at 11:41 AM on March 14, 2006


Do you take that stuff seriously, loquax?

Right after they quote widely-respected world pundit Pat Robertson, your article has this:
A recent article from the conservative US newspaper, the Washington Times with the title, “Venezuela Seeks Nuclear Technology”, gave the impression that Venezuela was about to take delivery of Nuclear Weapons from Iran to use against the US.

Now, read "Venezuela Seeks Nuclear Technology".
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:46 AM on March 14, 2006


Wow, go after Chavez AND Iran. Killing two birds with one stone."

And when the stuff is shipped on a North Korean freighter ... TRIFECTA.


A freighter staffed with French deckhands and unloaded at port by Syrian guest workers hopped up on 'Bolivian marching powder' - SEXAFECTA HEXAFECTA interesting times.

Atleast it wouldn't be as far to travel and most americans already understand spanish.

Wouldn't Latin be more useful?
posted by hangashore at 11:46 AM on March 14, 2006


See also; aluminum tubes; centrifuges.
posted by odinsdream at 11:47 AM on March 14, 2006


So did you read the whole thing sonofsamiam, or stop after the first paragraph?
posted by loquax at 11:49 AM on March 14, 2006


I read the whole thing.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:50 AM on March 14, 2006


just let iran build a nuclear power plant, who fuckin cares.
If they get a nuclear bomb, then destroy them.
posted by obeygiant at 11:53 AM on March 14, 2006


But does this really have to be an elaborate American plot to discredit Venezuela in preperation?

Are we pretending that Iraq didn't happen now? Or that America hasn't been gunning for Chavez since his election?
posted by Artw at 11:56 AM on March 14, 2006


So did you read the part where the answer to the rhetorical question asked by the headline is given as "no"?

And if you're saying the Times article didn't give the impression that Venezuela was looking to obtain nuclear weapons (an absurd suggestion, as far as I know), read this:

The administration official said there is no clear evidence that Mr. Chavez wants to develop nuclear weapons. But, the source said, there is consistent intelligence reporting that his government has discussed obtaining technology from other countries.
Mr. Chavez, a populist who has ratcheted up anti-U.S. rhetoric as he forges ties with some of America's adversaries, is in the middle of a military buildup that some analysts in the Bush administration fear is a precursor to ending elections.
"Chavez would like to have everything. He has the money to do it," said the official, noting Venezuela's vast oil reserves. "He wants new fighter jets. He wants to put a satellite in space."

...
During an interview on Arab-language Al Jazeera television, Mr. Chavez, who had just completed his trip to Iran, was asked about his confrontation with the United States and whether he feared being deposed as Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was:
"I am on the offensive," Mr. Chavez responded, according to a transcript from the British Broadcasting Corp., "because attack is the best form of defense. We are waging an offensive battle. Yesterday, in Tehran, the spiritual guide [Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei told me a true statement: power, power."


Seems like the possibility of a Venezuelan nuke is certainly suggested here. Anyways, that wasn't the point of the article I linked.
posted by loquax at 11:58 AM on March 14, 2006


It's certainly suggested if you've already made up your mind, I suppose.

If a Venenzuela/Iran nuclear conspiracy wasn't the part of the article you were intending to point out, I guess I don't follow you, considering the thread topic.
posted by sonofsamiam at 12:07 PM on March 14, 2006


Matt Drudge, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly seen furiously masturbating at the mere notion of a two-front war.
posted by wakko at 12:09 PM on March 14, 2006


Possiblilities, possibilities. Just about anything is possible. The question is always probability percentage.

This is really, really thin. Thin like the Moon's atmosphere thin.

wakko: three fronts. Afghanistan is still sort of a war.
posted by zoogleplex at 12:09 PM on March 14, 2006


I'm getting increasingly tired of discussions about nuclear weapons ending with "But they're trying to obtain (gasp) nuclear weapons!!"

The appropriate path after such a statement is:

So fucking what? Who cares? Do you not think it reasonable that countries might be interested in having some kind of deterrent to american invasion, given that america has actually invaded another country now? Jesus, the scaremongering is so thick you could cut it.
posted by odinsdream at 12:15 PM on March 14, 2006


Wouldn't Latin be more useful?

Subtle, yet satisfying.
posted by weston at 12:15 PM on March 14, 2006


Artw: Are we pretending that Iraq didn't happen now? Or that America hasn't been gunning for Chavez since his election?

That does not mean that every time it is reported that some country other than America does something unpleasant, that it is automatically some elaborate intelligence operation by the US government to prepare for war. Especially a speculative piece in the Washington Times that the State Deparment says they have no evidence for.

Heck, this is the kind of thing that plays right into Chavez's hands. He has been quite happy to make stuff up about the US invading his country, it supports a policy of using anti-invasion militias to intimidate his opponents.
posted by blahblahblah at 12:16 PM on March 14, 2006


*note that I fully support the idea of an end to all nuclear weapon manufacture, but that's not what the discussion is about now, and until the united states is willing to participate in such a program in a non-hypocritical fashion, it will remain an impossibility.
posted by odinsdream at 12:17 PM on March 14, 2006


Nice that the admin’s credibility is shot. It’d suck if something actually dangerous happened and no one gave a rat’s ass.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:23 PM on March 14, 2006


The boy who cried? Wolfowitz.
posted by sonofsamiam at 12:24 PM on March 14, 2006


sonofsamiam: The analysis I linked to suggested that Iran and Venezuela share no goals beyond asserting independence (from the US, primarily). In terms of domestic and foreign policy, they are miles apart, with Iran being about as far away from a socialist paradise as possible, and Venezuela trading with Israel. Beyond meaningless votes at the UN, and a few vague trade deals (and, of course, the oil), there's little to no connection between the two, according to the article.
posted by loquax at 12:44 PM on March 14, 2006


Venezuela has no strategic need to acquire nuclear weapons. I am not talking about the morality of the thing, just the strategic need. Iran, on the other hand, is next door to a failed state, and within striking range of Pakistan, India, and Israel, all nuclear powers.
posted by cell divide at 12:51 PM on March 14, 2006


Juan Cole says no
posted by rxrfrx at 12:54 PM on March 14, 2006




I'm starting to be inclined towards what Odinsdream is saying. Kooky as Chavez is, the guy is growing on me. I think maybe Chavez DOES have a strategic need for a couple of stand-off short range A-bombs since i think, based upon the cycles of US history, we will be putting some serious military pressure on the region in a decade or less.
posted by tkchrist at 1:29 PM on March 14, 2006


"Matt Drudge, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly seen furiously masturbating at the mere notion of a two-front war."

Aren't we all ready on one with Afganastan and Iraq? so theis would be a thrid front?
posted by Elim at 1:37 PM on March 14, 2006


Man, it’s as nutty as a pro-wrestling script.
posted by Smedleyman at 2:15 PM on March 14, 2006


Can we have a summary of the NYT article for us non-subscribers?

Right off the top of my head it sounds like another step in a high-end game of "Telephone" to me. Y'know, the one we played in grade school where each person whispers a message into the next one's ear, who then repeats it to the next one, and it comes out all wrong on the other end and everyone laughs?

Of course we didn't start wars in grade school. Not big ones anyway, just a few playground rough-ups.
posted by zoogleplex at 2:41 PM on March 14, 2006


Can we have a summary of the NYT article for us non-subscribers?

1999 review of a Venezuelan restaurant in the east village that serves tres leches. Attempted humor. Failed.
posted by eddydamascene at 3:05 PM on March 14, 2006


From Global. security.org: Iran's existing domestic uranium mines. Why exactly would Iran be needing to buy uranium from Venezuela?

Since 1988, Iran has reportedly opened as many as 10 uranium mines, including the Saghand uranium mine in Yazd province, as well otherwise unspecified locations in Khorassan, Sistan va Baluchestan, and Hormozgan Provinces, and in Bandar-e-Abbas and Badar-e-Lengeh Provinces along the Gulf. The Director of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization, Reza Amrollahi, announced in 1989 that the expected reserves of these deposts was in excess of 5,000 tons.

Uranium resources of Iran are not considered rich. The results of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) exploration activities have shown proven reserves of about 3,000 tons of Uranium so far. According to the discovered indices (more than 350 anomalies) and the results of the field discoveries, the expected resources of Iran could be at the range of 20,000-30,000 tons of U3O8, throughout the country. Therefore Iran's domestic reserves might be sufficient enough to supply the raw material for needed nuclear power plants in future.

posted by rdone at 4:00 PM on March 14, 2006


*smacks forehead*

The joke doesn't work if not everyone can hear the punchline...
posted by zoogleplex at 4:06 PM on March 14, 2006


odinsdream: given that america has actually invaded another country now?

Precisely, and also given that America claims the moral high ground of a right to possess nuclear weapons, which we alone have used in actual hostilities. The self-righteousness of it is apparent to the whole world. Americans who don't understand this are parochial idiots.

Well, this is the real security cost of Bush's folly. We have neither the forces nor the credibility to do anything about real threats now that we've invented a giant fake one to serve domestic political agendas. Reap the whirlwind indeed. Thanks a lot, Mr. "Thirty Six Percent" Bush. Not saying this is real, but if it was there would be little we could do about it except jawbone. And if it isn't, well, here we go again. War and rumors of war. It's what keeps our Dear Leader's gang in power.
posted by fourcheesemac at 4:32 PM on March 14, 2006


The U.S. invade a Latin American country? That's unpossible!
posted by signal at 7:59 PM on March 14, 2006


« Older Can you hear me now?   |   Comment is free Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post