Well, that would shorten the solution by about 71 hours and 30 minutes.

“Iran will not be allowed to have nuclear weapons. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. Right now we are committed to doing it the hard way, because I believe in giving the hard way a chance. But, if Iran desires, we can do this the easy way. With the easy way, we can solve this dilemma in 72 hours.” (Big grin) “Just ask Damascus JAPAN.”

—-Fixed—-

Lancer on October 29, 2007 at 7:00 PM

“We have a system. If countries have information that a country is working on a nuclear-related program, they should come to us,” said ElBaradai. “But to bomb first and then ask questions later, I think it undermines the system and it doesn’t lead to any solution to any suspicion.”

Go to the UN? Why? So they can do nothing?

“Iran will not be allowed to have nuclear weapons. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. Right now we are committed to doing it the hard way, because I believe in giving the hard way a chance. But, if Iran desires, we can do this the easy way. With the easy way, we can solve this dilemma in 72 hours.” (Big grin) “Just ask Damascus.”

Actually, I think there’s a strong chance he believes what he’s saying- he’s simply delusional; a bureaucrat who believes every conflict can be solved through the bureaucratic process- if only we give the bureaucrats enough time, money and power.
Hollowpoint on October 29, 2007 at 3:54 PM

Notice he says he has “not recieved evidence”. He has no grasp of the idea that his agency is tasked with actually accomplishing something in the real world (non-proliferation) and the failure of his agency could lead to death and war in the real world. To these people at the U.N. it is just a burecratic problem. If only someone would submit the proper paperwork this whole problem would go away.

There is a single reactor nearing completion at Bushehr, but it is being built under contract with Moscow, and it is only supposed to use nuclear fuel provided by Russia.

“But to bomb first and then ask questions later, I think it undermines the system and it doesn’t lead to any solution to any suspicion.”

Actually it is the only one that lead to a solution, boom, problem solved.

IAEA: OK. We’ll ask the Syrians about it.

Israel: No. You can’t just go tell them about it. They’ll deny it. Then they’ll dismantle it. Then they’ll cover it up.

IAEA: Syria is head of the UN WMD authority. We have to notify them.

Israel: See the problem.

*bombs away*

Nuke site go bye-bye. Welcome to Problem Solving 101.

fogw on October 29, 2007 at 3:46 PM

Couldn’t agree more.

Anybody who thinks this man believes a WORD he’s saying, stand on their head.
Dr. Gecko on October 29, 2007 at 3:48 PM

Actually, I think there’s a strong chance he believes what he’s saying- he’s simply delusional; a bureaucrat who believes every conflict can be solved through the bureaucratic process- if only we give the bureaucrats enough time, money and power.

He’s from the UN, so he’ll do or say anything to avoid a military conflict. Sadly, that approach too often leads to conflagration. At least these guys don’t go into medicine. Do you want to excise the cancer early or wait and amputate later?

Why do so many ding-a-lings in America still want to follow the edicts of the UN?

I just don’t get it.

“We have a system. If countries have information that a country is working on a nuclear-related program, they should come to us,” said ElBaradai. “But to bomb first and then ask questions later, I think it undermines the system and it doesn’t lead to any solution to any suspicion.”

Nuke site go bye-bye. Welcome to Problem Solving 101.

Also known as The Israeli Solution, this shoot first ask questions later scenario has kept Israel from turning into an ash heap for well over 25 years now.

“We have a system. If countries have information that a country is working on a nuclear-related program, they should come to us,” said ElBaradai. “But to bomb first and then ask questions later, I think it undermines the system and it doesn’t lead to any solution to any suspicion.”

I asked it before, and I’ll ask it again. Can someone cite any example of an international agency responding favorably to a concern expressed by the State of Israel — much less acting on the concern?

Seriously, ElBaradei being on the watch is like a real life Airplane-esque spoof of international affairs. But who am I to argue with a Nobel Prize winner (who incidentally has done nothing for which the award was given for)? I would have taken the prize for my efforts in monitoring and deterring nuclear arms… I’ve done as much and I would have agreed to a fraction of the money given out.

Meanwhile, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on Sunday criticized the United States and Israel for failing to provide the UN watchdog with intelligence about Syria’s purported nuclear program.

ElBaradei told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that the IAEA had not received any information about a Syrian program until after the bombing, which he called distressing.

“We have a system. If countries have information that a country is working on a nuclear-related program, they should come to us,” said ElBaradai. “But to bomb first and then ask questions later, I think it undermines the system and it doesn’t lead to any solution to any suspicion.”