I wanted to know if you think (Realistically) even US has the power to ask Israel to leave all nukes?
Now If Iran sees Israel as a threat to it's existence, should it not avail nukes like Israel?
Again I am against all such weapons but our world is not full of sugar and spices (And everything nice). We have some very bad actors who want to go for another war.
Wanted to hear your ideas on this...
Shalom!
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Mar 5, 2012 1:12 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Nuclear Weapons Are Sinful: Ayatollah Ali Khameini
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2012 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Nuclear Weapons Are Sinful: Ayatollah Ali Khameini
I have no problem with your ideas either. No nation should have nukes!!
HOWEVER are you going impose "Sanctions" on Israel until it dismantles her nukes?
You need to have a level playing field when dealing with different nations. Israel has been attacking her neighbors and if you want to force Iranian (Or other nations for that matter ) NOT to have any nukes, you need to ensure they are not facing any "Nuke threats" from aggressive countries like Israel.
I have no problem in having sanctions against Iran BUT clearly there is a double standard on this issue. That is what Mr. Anwar is talking about.
I am glad to see Ayatuallahs of Iran think nukes are sinful. I hope more countries of that region joins him declaring it a nuke free zone.
Shalom!
Sent from my iPhone
= The Ayatollah Is Right About One Thing: Nuclear Weapons Are Sinful
Posted on Feb 29, 2012
AP / Vahid Salemi
Loans under 729K usually qualify for US GOV backed refinance programs
theeasyloansite.com
__._,_.___
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Monday, March 5, 2012
Re: [mukto-mona] Nuclear Weapons Are Sinful: Ayatollah Ali Khameini
With due respect, this is a "Pie in the sky answer".
-----Original Message-----
Nuclear bomb is the worst thing man has invested in. Probably it is not too late. Mad competition must be stopped. Next step should be to gradually destroy the arsenal lying scattered throughout the world until the inventory is reduced to zero.
From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
:-)
-----Original Message----- From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> To: Mohiuddin Anwar <mohiuddin@netzero.net> Cc: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>; dahuk <dahuk@yahoogroups.com>; ovimot <ovimot@yahoogroups.com>; jnrsr53 <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>; chottala <chottala@yahoogroups.com>; odhora <odhora@yahoogroups.com>; nazrulic <nazrulic@gmail.com>; syed.aslam3 <syed.aslam3@gmail.com>; akhtergolam <akhtergolam@gmail.com>; liaquat707 <liaquat707@gmail.com> Sent: Sat, Mar 3, 2012 7:57 pm Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Nuclear Weapons Are Sinful: Ayatollah Ali Khameini On Mar 3, 2012, at 1:23 AM, "Mohiuddin Anwar" <mohiuddin@netzero.net> wrote:
Mr. Anwar's opinions are self contradictory. There must not be any 'If ----------then" logic. No country should have it. The countries which have it must destroy it. There must be absolutely "No" to nuclear arsenal.
Why nobody is talking about Israeli nukes?
Most critics believe Israel posses huge nuclear arsenal with the help from her western backers.
Why state of Israel has immunity to keep its nukes ?
Why civilized western world never talk about vast arsenal of Israeli nukes?
If poor nations like India, Pakistan can obtain nukes, why it's wrong for other rich nations in Middle East to have it, even they can't even think about this nukes?
Is nuclear the monopoly of selected nations ?
Why nuclear discrimination continuing in modern World?
My understanding is that not only nukes, all unconventional deadly weapons should be eliminated for a peaceful World.
We heard about Nuclear Chapabazi(Lie) by western powers about so called Iraqi Nukes before attacking Iraq to destroy its nukes, but
unfortunately, nothing found but million human lives were lost for this Chapabazi(Lie). Why such devastation ? To protect whom?
Nobody paid price or questioned for this Chapabazi(Lie)
My understanding is that, If Israel can posses Nukes, than why my motherland Bangladesh can't also get nukes to protect its territorial integrity from foreign aggression?
Finally to protect the volatile Middle East , Middle East should be declared 'Nuclear Free Zone' by the United Nations and enforced by all Big Powers
I think religion does have a place in politics, as a voice in the public arena, but a voice speaking from a moral high ground above the fray, not as one of the manipulating, cheating, indoctrinating tool in the hands of one of the parties jostling for power. The infested mindset of the Pakistani glory and pride in owning the 'Islamic Bomb' is an outdated and tiresome 'wannabe like the West' or better and 'holier than thou' mindset that should look for a permanent cure soon. Farida Majid ======================= << Neither Iraq nor Iran had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks that launched our nation on a never-ending and essentially irrational �war on terror.� Irrational, because the terrorist enemy has come to be defined through political convenience rather than through an objective threat assessment. Iran�s Shiite leaders were sworn enemies of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida, which was inspired and financed by the Wahhabi Sunnis of Saudi Arabia. >>
Email
Print
Share
A pro-government Iranian demonstrator holds a poster with photos of the late revolutionary founder Ayatollah Khomeini, right, and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, at an annual demonstration in front of the former U.S. Embassy in Tehran.
Given my own deep prejudice toward religious zealotry, it has not been difficult for me to accept the conventional American view that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme theocratic ruler of Iran, is a dangerous madman never to be trusted with a nuclear weapon. How then to explain his recent seemingly logical and humane religious proclamations on the immorality of nuclear weapons? His statement challenges the acceptance of nuclear war-fighting as an option by every U.S. president since Harry Truman, who, in 1945, ordered the deaths of 185,000 mostly innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
�We do not see any glory, pride or power in the nuclear weapons�quite the opposite,� Iran�s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said Tuesday in summarizing the ayatollah�s views. Salehi added, �The production, possession, use or threat of use of nuclear weapons are illegitimate, futile, harmful, dangerous and prohibited as a great sin.�
Of course, the ayatollah�s position will be largely interpreted by the media and politicians in the United States as a devious trick to lull critics, but words of such clarity will not be so easily dismissed by his devout followers. They are words that one wishes our own government would embrace to add moral consistency to our condemnation of other countries we claim might be joining us in holding nuclear arms.
As awkward as it may be to recall, it was the United States that gifted the world with these sinful weapons. And even more to the point of assessing sin, ours is the only nation that has ever used such weapons toward their intended purpose of killing large numbers of the innocent. That fact alone should provoke some measure of humility in responding to Salehi�s offer this week at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to negotiate a treaty banning nuclear weapons.
Unfortunately, his remarks were all too predictably met with swift condemnation by the United States. Laura E. Kennedy, the American ambassador to the conference, said that Iran�s claim to be opposed to such weapons �stands in sharp contrast� to that nation�s failure to comply with international obligations. But the fact is that the administration she represents has stated that there is as yet no evidence that Iran is committed to building a nuclear bomb.
She is right that Iran�s resistance to inspection �is hardly illustrative of a commitment to nuclear disarmament,� but such a remark is grotesquely hypocritical coming from the representative of a nation that has produced more than half of the world�s nuclear arsenal under the most severe conditions of secrecy. It is also true that U.S. acceptance of nuclear weapons in Israel and Pakistan, both of which have been recipients of American military aid despite breaking international nonproliferation codes to which U.S. presidents have long subscribed, is hardly a sign of consistency on this issue.
It is obvious, in a week when the U.S. welcomed North Korea�s renewed commitment to inspections, that even the most recalcitrant of nations can be induced to reason. The treatment of Iran is complicated by this being a U.S. election season, during which the Republican candidates, with the exception of Ron Paul, have been beating the war drums over what they claim is Iran�s nuclear threat. In no way has the GOP�s zeal for military confrontation been chastened by the fact that a similar crusade in 2003 by Republican hawks led to the invasion of Iraq over patently false claims that it was developing a nuclear arsenal. The result was a pro-Iranian government in Baghdad.
Neither Iraq nor Iran had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks that launched our nation on a never-ending and essentially irrational �war on terror.� Irrational, because the terrorist enemy has come to be defined through political convenience rather than through an objective threat assessment. Iran�s Shiite leaders were sworn enemies of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida, which was inspired and financed by the Wahhabi Sunnis of Saudi Arabia. Yet when the Obama administration recently concluded a huge, 10-year arms deal with the Saudi kingdom, the top Republican candidates were in full approval.
Of course the world�s people should be alarmed by the prospect of Iran, or any other nation, joining the nuclear weapons club. But demonizing Iran and attempting to further isolate that nation�s leadership hardly advances the cause of nonproliferation. If Washington can find a basis of reasonable accommodation with a bizarrely erratic and paranoid North Korea, serious negotiations with Iran should be eminently possible. A place to begin would be with the acceptance that the justifiably reviled ayatollah might for once be demonstrating moral leadership when he denounces all nuclear weapons, including those in our own massive arsenal, as sinful.
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional