During his reign, the Shah received significant American support, frequently making state visits to the White House and earning praise from numerous American Presidents. The Shah's close ties to Washington and his bold agenda of rapidly Westernizing Iran soon began to infuriate certain segments of the Iranian population, especially the hardline Islamic conservatives. Because of their eventual ascension to power during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Operation Ajax is considered as one of the worst CIA operation ever.
III. Iranian attempt to Provide Nuclear Power for Electricity
Starting in the mid-1980s, Iran approached several nuclear suppliers about the possibility of completing the proposed “Bushehr-1” facility, in hopes of providing the ever-growing population of Iran with power for electricity through nuclear plants. After being turned down by Western European countries, Iran turned to China and the Soviet Union for nuclear technology.
On March 6, 1990, the Soviet Union and Iran signed their first protocol on the project, stipulating that Moscow would complete the Bushehr plant and build an additional two reactors in Iran. The deal was delayed, however, by technical and financial problems. The Bushehr nuclear facility is associated with the city of the same name, but is actually located near Halileh about 12 km (8 miles) south of Bushehr proper. The site is also the location of Iran's Nuclear Energy College.
There are approximately 6.8 million people living in that region, this plant being the potential target of aerial strikes.
Last month, an announcement was made from Tehran that the first nuclear power plant will be operational within three months, providing electricity to Iran's national power grid by the summer.Russia started delivering nuclear fuel to the facility a week ago as part of a compromise effort to alleviate concerns over Iran's nuclear intentions while supporting Iran's right to a nuclear energy program.The United States, several European nations and Israel suspect Tehran has been trying to acquire nuclear weapons, but Iran denies its nuclear program is for anything but peaceful purposes.
A recent U.S. intelligence summary concluded that, contrary to earlier suspicions, Iran halted its nuclear weapons development in 2003. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/03/iran.nuclear/index.html However, due to pressure from the US, the UN has imposed 3 rounds of economic sanctions against Iran.Iran also said it "will soon announce international tender for construction of 19 new 1,000-megawatt nuclear power plants.” The measure would be "taken in line with" the parliament's approval "for generating 20,000 megawatt of electricity to meet domestic demands."
IV. Nuclear “Obliteration; destruction (n.); annihilation, eradication, elimination, abolition”
So why are the candidates who are running for the democratic votes talking about “nuclear options?” Sounds like such a neat little package, just drop a nuclear bomb and the government of Iran will comply. The definitions above explain exactly what obliteration means, and by using that word, Clinton, as well as Obama know exactly what they are talking about.
Unknown to most, and later buried in classified materials, in August 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney had instructed STRATCOM to prepare:
“a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States... [including] a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons... not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States."
The reason cited for the attack to use mini-nukes is that the targets are hardened or are deep underground and would not be destroyed by non-nuclear warheads. http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/zFacts_2005_03_15_Joint_Nuclear_Operations.pdf http://forum.stirpes.net/geopolitcs/16242-pre-emptive-nuclear-strike-key-option-nato-told.html
The Bush administration's new nuclear doctrine contains specific "guidelines" which allow for "preemptive" nuclear strikes against "rogue enemies" which "possess" or are "developing" weapons of mass destruction (WMD). (2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations (DJNO)). The document, revising the existing one from 1995, written by the Pentagon’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, under the direction of Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman, states:
Summary of Changes: Revision of Joint Publication 3-12
Contains discussion of both strategic and theater and nuclear operations
Covers the purpose of United States nuclear forces
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
