Jimmy Carter’s NSA: Hey, let’s shoot down Israeli jets if they fly over Iraq to attack Iran

posted at 6:54 pm on September 20, 2009 by Allahpundit

A stark reminder via Goldfarb that no matter how bad you think The One is, we could do — and have done — worse.

DB: How aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military strike might be in America’s worst interest?

Brzezinski: We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?

DB: What if they fly over anyway?

Brzezinski: Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse.

Goldfarb in reply: “So conjure the image — the Obama administration sending U.S. aircraft up to protect Iran’s airspace and it’s nuclear installations from an attack by a democracy that is one of America’s closest allies.” Indeed. Why is it, I wonder, that this eminence grise of the left, whose side is forever screeching at the right to stop warmongering and embrace diplomacy, is suddenly ready to start blowing F-15s out of the sky over Baghdad instead of reprimanding Israel diplomatically after the fact? That’s an awfully curious stroke of belligerence given that (a) the IAF would be entering Iraqi airspace to attack not the United States but one of its chief enemies, (b) a successful attack on Iran’s facilities would at least delay a nuclear crisis in the Gulf for a few years, and (c) the only reason Israel hasn’t struck already is because it’s put its faith, very stupidly, in the west’s ability to deter Iran with, ahem, diplomacy. In an odd way, it reminds me of the DNC promising a “rain of hellfire” on critics of ObamaCare while The One’s gearing up to schmooze with the dregs of international autocracy this week at the UN. Our side likes to bait the left by accusing them of weakness, but they seem plenty capable of tough talk and hardline reprisals if you’re an American conservative or Israeli Zionist. Funny, that.

As for Brzezinski’s creepy anticipation of a new U.S.S. Liberty incident, whether “in reverse” or not, Goldfarb’s got that right too. Maybe not for ZB but for many others, that’s not a bug in the plan, it’s a feature.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

Jimmy Carter, he’s as much a Christian as Judas Iscariot!

Orange Doorhinge on September 21, 2009 at 1:38 AM

Lew Rockwell calls Carter the least evil U.S. president.

Not necessarily a good president but one that was not evil. I don’t think that’s such a bad assessment.

Spathi on September 21, 2009 at 1:59 AM

Besides, that’s just the type of story the Carter Administration would have loved to make public.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 1:20 AM

The soldiers quoted in the story say that we have tapes and that there are tapes missing that prove Israel knew it was firing on a US ship.

What I was saying, and maybe not to well, was that Israel may have tapes of conversations between their leaders and ours in which they request our ship leaves the area- and it didn’t, and was then fired upon.

Would the US, in a war sit, after asking a friendly or foe to leave an area and they didn’t comply fire on them? If that answer is yes, then you have to accept that other countries will do the same.
Did the Israelis have proof that our intercept was somehow leaking to the other side? Were we straddling the fence? Remember what B-ski said about his joy of the US getting Russia in a 10 year war with Afghanistan? How it came back to bite us in the rear?

Both sides may have quietly agreed not to pursue an investigation because each side may have compelling evidence that their actions were justified.

I don’t think Carter would have wanted to out LBJ, a fellow Democrat but he would have outed the Israelis if the US had the tapes and Israel didn’t have anything- or he used the tapes to force Israel into the Camp David Peace Agreement.

journeyintothewhirlwind on September 21, 2009 at 2:06 AM

As former Detroit Mayor Coleman Young made clear in his administration that there can only be one HMFIC in any organization. Hizzoner in fact had a plaque on his desk emblazoned with that acronym. Off the record, Young used a more racially charged version, HNIC, that dates to the slavery era when slaves were separated into two castes, the field slaves and the house slaves.

There can only be one HMFIC. Obama cut his political teeth in Chicago. An earlier Chicago ‘community organizer, Al Capone, is said to have favored using baseball bats to dispatch subordinates. Obama prefers tossing them under the bus, in this case with leaks to friendly MSM journalists that damages Patterson’s campaign.

rokemronnie on September 21, 2009 at 2:07 AM

Lanceman on September 20, 2009 at 11:31 PM

No, I don’t think there have been any trolls who have admitted their former names. There are people here that are really good at recognizing their writing styles so it usually isn’t long before they are known. The really crazy thing is that several of them have been banned multiple times for writing almost the exact same thing. I don’t know why that shocks me, they aren’t very imaginative when they comment, why would they branch out when it comes to insults?

Cindy Munford on September 20, 2009 at 11:40 PM

It’s also that some users change their I.D.’s, and are not trolls, nor were banned.

Lourdes on September 21, 2009 at 2:17 AM

Sorry about the post to the wrong thread.

Regarding the Liberty, Michael Oren, now Israel’s ambassador to the US, is a regarded historian and interestingly formerly a “new historian” that questioned Israeli “myths” but has come to accept reality. Oren has published an extensive review of the incident using declassified Israeli military documents.

We’ll never know what the Liberty was doing because all the Naval Intelligence members of the crew were killed in the attack. The captain didn’t even know the real mission. American military sources will not say what the Liberty was doing. By all indications from Israeli documents and accounts, it was a case of mistaken identity, not unlike friendly fire incidents that take lives in all combat.

If you’re going to say that the Liberty was the victim of a deliberate attack on a US flagged warship, youd have to call most friendly fire incidents murder.

Occam’s Razor says it was a mistake, not a deliberate attack.

In any case, Israel accepted responsibility and paid compensation to the families. Any further bleating about the subject makes me question people’s motives.

American servicemen died in the crossfire of a military conflict in which they were not directly involved. That’s a tragedy, not a crime. It’s interesting that you never see the “USS Liberty crowd” expressing concern over Hezb’allah’s bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 Americans.

rokemronnie on September 21, 2009 at 2:19 AM

Occam’s Razor says it was a mistake, not a deliberate attack.

rokemronnie on September 21, 2009 at 2:19 AM

I know Occam, and that is certainly not his razor.

You are thinking of another maxim:

Never ascribe to intent what you can ascribe to incompetence.

When that guy cuts you off on the highway, suppress that urge to think he did it deliberately, even if he came from behind you before doing it. He was probably just talking on his cellphone. You can be sure he intended it only when he shows you his middle finger.

That said, there’s another maxim which people who deal with the government remember:

Sometimes the paranoid person is right.

We use this one with Obama all the time, and I think a good dose works with any foreign government (including Israel) as well.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 2:57 AM

journeyintothewhirlwind on September 21, 2009 at 2:06 AM

My point is that such tapes, and even such a request, would make Isreal look so belligerent that it would cost them a lot of valuable American support. The Isrealis would not be so foolish as to challenge directly the right of a US Naval vessel to be anywhere in international waters it chose to be (which is where the Liberty was when it was attacked). If your scenario is correct, the Isrealis have lied about the non-intention behind the attack, as has our government.

If true, imagine the rage when the thing is released, and imagine what damage it will do to relations between the United States and Isreal. I suspect we’d halt all aid to Isreal, abrogate any mutual defense treaties, and the Democrats would almost certainly be out of office in the next election cycle.

I think that the reality is that such a tape does not exist, and no such request was made by Israel. It’s too damaging a smoking gun to have lain in some warehouse next to the Ark of the Covenant all these years.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 3:07 AM

The Brez is back!

TexasJew on September 21, 2009 at 3:17 AM

Here’s a little nugget that got lots of people very scared back in 1977, and which I remember vividly:
“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities. ”
— Zbigniew Brzezinski

TexasJew on September 21, 2009 at 3:24 AM

Wondering out loud, hypothetically, if a poster was banned, then rejoined through OR, and alluded to their former ’self’, would said poster be re-banned if they stayed within the guidelines?

Lanceman on September 20, 2009 at 11:18 PM

The ones I’ve seen were banned a second and third time because they repeated what got them banned the first time around. The one who added 3 numbers after her name(s) comes to mind.

Blake on September 21, 2009 at 3:43 AM

I was born the the day Mr. Peanut took office and really don’t remember the period at all, but, will someone who’s old enough to remember please explain to me

HOW THE HELL DID HE AND THAT GANG OF JACKASSES EVER GET ANYWHERE NEAR THE WHITEHOUSE!?!

They all would appear to be outta their damned minds!

SuperCool on September 21, 2009 at 5:26 AM

Lourdes on September 21, 2009 at 2:17 AM

Sure, that’s true, but the question was whether people who had gotten banned come back under another name and let the commenters know. People change there names and some people comment under multiple names.

Cindy Munford on September 21, 2009 at 6:25 AM

Zbig is a big Globalist gov’t guy so no surprise here.

He worked for the fab presidency of James Earl Carter III (Jew hater) what can you expect?

As for worst presidents?
1. Carter
2. Hoover
3. Harding
4. Pierce / Buchannan
5. Obama
6. Nixon
7. Wilson
8. FDR
9. LBJ
10. Bush 41/Bush 43

Did I get any of them wrong?

PappyD61 on September 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Isn’t it Iraqi air space?
Does the democratically elected prime minister in Iraq have the right to refuse to allow it or shoot down plane’s in their airspace?

mags on September 21, 2009 at 8:49 AM

PappyD61 on September 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Kennedy, No:2. The others move down one place.

OldEnglish on September 21, 2009 at 9:03 AM

Did I get any of them wrong?

PappyD61 on September 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Yeah. Take W. off that list.

Lanceman on September 21, 2009 at 9:38 AM

Given Brzezinski’s comment, you should not wonder why the Iranian hostage crisis happened back in the Carter years.

Phil Byler on September 21, 2009 at 9:49 AM

“I miss the good old day of the pogroms papa Brzezinski told me about, then nobody frowned upon killing the Jews, it was just considered a good policy …now we have to make up all kinds of stuff….”

/Zbigniew Brzezinski

runner on September 21, 2009 at 9:54 AM

Did I get any of them wrong?

PappyD61 on September 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Where’s the ‘I did not have sex with that woman’ president? Surely you don’t think Blow Job Billy was better than the Bush’s?

RickZ on September 21, 2009 at 10:01 AM

Where’s the ‘I did not have sex with that woman’ president? Surely you don’t think Blow Job Billy was better than the Bush’s?

RickZ on September 21, 2009 at 10:01 AM

Slick Willie’s stupidity was severely constrained by a Republican congress after 1994. So the actual damage he inflicted wasn’t anywhere close to the damage caused by Carter. Hopefully, the same will happen to O in 2010.

That being said, I’d remove Bush from the top 10.

Meezles on September 21, 2009 at 10:19 AM

They said that there is 10,000 targets in Iran. Primary among these are all nuclear facilities, including the nuclear power plant at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf coast near Kuwait, and the nuclear enrichment facilities in Natanz near Esfahan.

Bushehr is an industrial city, with nearly 1 million residents. As many as 70,000 foreign engineers work in the region, which includes a large gas field. Natanz is Iran’s primary enrichment site, north of Esfahan, which also has nuclear research facilities. Esfahan is a world heritage city with a population of 2 million.

As nuclear reactor fuel is used, it turns into uranium 238, which has a half life of 4.5 billion years. These radioactive isotopes are dangerous to health because they emit alpha particles and because they are chemically toxic. When inhaled, they damage lung tissue. When ingested, they damage kidneys and cause cancer in bones and in liver tissues
According to a recent review of medical research, uranium exposure causes babies to be deformed or born dead.

Never in history has it happened that nuclear power plants and nuclear enrichment facilities have been deliberately bombed. Such facilities, everywhere in the world, operate under severe safety conditions because the release of radioactive materials is deadly, immediately and also long after exposure.

If Israel deliberately bomb a fully fueled nuclear power plant or nuclear fuel enrichment facilities, containment will be breached; radioactive elements will be released into the environment. There will be horrific deaths for families in the surrounding vicinity.
The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated 3 million deaths would result in 3 weeks from bombing the nuclear enrichment facilities near Esfahan, and the contamination would cover Afghanistan, Pakistan, all the way to India.

Bombing such facilities will require powerful explosives, earth penetrator war heads, maybe nuclear warheads. The explosions will blow the contamination high into the atmosphere. Where will it go is a question that is difficult to predict.

Announcing that they successfully bombed a Syrian nuclear reactor, with no ill effects. Israel has also bombed the Osiraq nuclear reactor in Iraq. See, it’s easy. Nothing bad happens. But those were both construction sites, not loaded reactors full of tons of enriched uranium.

The planet is not large. What goes around, comes around. Smoke from the Gulf War oil fires went around the world and was detected in South America. Radioactive fallout from bombing a nuclear reactor will also go far, especially considering that it has millions of years to make the trip.

Military forces in the Persian Gulf, in Iraq, and infghanistan need to wonder how expendable they are.

mags on September 21, 2009 at 10:40 AM

mags on September 21, 2009 at 10:40 AM

So, the answer might be a small breach – just enough to contaminate the site?

OldEnglish on September 21, 2009 at 10:55 AM

If Obama doesn’t refute this kind of rhetoric (and of course he won’t), Israel truly does stand alone. This is getting worse by the day.

infidel4life on September 21, 2009 at 11:22 AM

HOW THE HELL DID HE AND THAT GANG OF JACKASSES EVER GET ANYWHERE NEAR THE WHITEHOUSE!?!

They all would appear to be outta their damned minds!

SuperCool on September 21, 2009 at 5:26 AM

The simple answer is, “President Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon.” Democrats made hay out of that act for the next election.

Curiously, Gerald Ford received a Profile in Courage Award in 2001 from the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation: “President Gerald Ford was honored for his courage in making a controversial decision of conscience to pardon former President Richard M. Nixon.”

After the Democrats have smeared opponent’s name and used them as objects of derision for decades, they give them an award for laying down on the floor like a carpet.

ExpressoBold on September 21, 2009 at 11:32 AM

This just confirms what a Jew hating Nazi Jimmy Carter is.

Jerricho68 on September 21, 2009 at 11:40 AM

1. Clinton
2. Nixon
3. FDR
4. LBJ
5. Wilson
6. Carter
7. Obama
8. Pierce

Those would be my order of horrid presidents, and I have a simple reason for that:
Clinton committed a felony in office, as did Nixon. Those two are 1 & 1a – and until someone else commits a felony, they remain there. The damage they did to this country and our political system and discourse are irreparable, and I believe both the Carter and Obama debacles are the consequences of their administrations.

GWB certainly wasn’t a great president, but he’s hardly close to the bottom, very lower -middle of the pack. LBJ and FDR are two of the most damaging presidents due to their successes – as opposed to Obama (SO FAR), Carter, and to a lesser degree Wilson their overwhelming failures.

I really hesitate to put Obama on here because he hasn’t completed a term, but, his 7 mos have been amongst the worst 7mos of any president ever, so that seems reason enough.

I Think Grant probably goes on this list as well, since his administration was amongst the most corrupt ever.

WashingtonsWake on September 21, 2009 at 11:42 AM

1. Brzezinski is Polish
2. Auschwitz was “annexed” by Germany when they invaded Poland.
3. Auschwitz was named Birkenau by Germany
4. Birkenau is the German translation of Brzezinka
5. Brzezinski wants to kill Joooooos

Okay, you be the judge.

CC

CapedConservative on September 21, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Keep movin’ – nothing to see here.

Fuquay Steve on September 21, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Lew Rockwell calls Carter the least evil U.S. president.

Not necessarily a good president but one that was not evil. I don’t think that’s such a bad assessment.

Spathi on September 21, 2009 at 1:59 AM

-snicker-

Spathi, if you’re just determined to make yourself a joke….

tom on September 21, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Did I get any of them wrong?

PappyD61 on September 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Seriously, Obama has only been in office 8 months and he has already done just as much damage as the others on the list… so I think his ranking has a bullet to the top.

And Bush kept us safe after 9-11–even his arch enemy Obama has had to concede his programs are working for the good of the country. Bush gets bad grades for PR… MOSTLY… the current impression is the result of the Alinsky rules used against him not his actual actions.

petunia on September 21, 2009 at 12:39 PM

I had a late brother-in -law who was named Zbigniew (a common name in Poland) who was the epitome of virtue -genereous -honest -humble -and strong family man and Church goer.

He would roll over in his grave if he could hear this excuse for a Polish American talk such treasonous in spirit talk. He and his boss are poster children for the words incompetence, failure. I was going to add arrogance, but we have that impotent messiah guy that takes that label uncontested.

Don L on September 21, 2009 at 1:06 PM

CapedConservative on September 21, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Actually, Birkenau was a sub-camp in the Auswitz complex. It was where the “showers” (gas chambers) were. Most of the 40 or so other camps in the Auswitz complex were work camps, where slave labor was used on specific industries vital to the Nazi war effort until the workers were “used up”. “Used up” workers were selected by Nazi medical doctors and then sent to Birkenau for final disposition.

I’m using polite words here, but you get the idea.

You should note that the outside Polish resistance organized the unsuccessful revolt by the sonderkommandos of Birkenau, and supplied weapons for same. The scheme depended on the Allies making an airdrop of weapons, and the Allies did not come through, because they didn’t believe the intelligence which Witold Pilecki acquired by deliberately being captured as a subversive to be sent to Auswitz, and who was executed by the Communists after the war for similar subversive activity.

When you tar Poles the way you do, you dishonor the memory not only of Captain Pilecki, but also of other Poles such as Joseph and Victoria Ulma, who, along with their children, were executed by the Nazis for harboring Jews.

You are certainly welcome to find fault with Brzezinski, but don’t tar other Poles with the same brush.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Lew Rockwell calls Carter the least evil U.S. president.

Not necessarily a good president but one that was not evil. I don’t think that’s such a bad assessment.

Spathi on September 21, 2009 at 1:59 AM

-snicker-

Spathi, if you’re just determined to make yourself a joke….

tom on September 21, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Lew Rockwell has you know what for brains. Carter is a Democrat.Democrats support the holocaust of abortion.
All Democrats, by definition are EVIL.

Jeff from WI on September 21, 2009 at 1:23 PM

But here is just a question. We have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, with our future Afghanistan requiring political reconciliation, not to mention issues in Pakistan. It does not really seem to be in US interests to have Israel unilaterally or bilaterally destablilize the region further while we are trying to stabilize areas of the middle east. That being the case we are not giving them access to Iraqi airspace. If they just disregard our position, what do we do in that case? There should be no “Liberty in Reverse” because Israel, for all the financial support we give them, should know their place and not defy us. They couldn’t exist without our 30k per capita or whatever we give. While seeingn Zbig’s words in print are shocking, what should we do in that case?

LevStrauss on September 21, 2009 at 1:24 PM

Those would be my order of horrid presidents, and I have a simple reason for that:
Clinton committed a felony in office, as did Nixon.

WashingtonsWake on September 21, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Using that as a guide, where is Kennedy? Surely he committed more felonies while in office than anyone else listed?

Jaibones on September 21, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Of course Carter was and is evil. Thee is no credible debaet on the subject.

proconstitution on September 21, 2009 at 2:04 PM

Here’s an idea. Send Carter over there and leave him there and take away his cell phone. No one needs to hear from him again, he was an idiot before and an idiot now. I think he is upset that Barry may be a worse president than him and is proving that is was the worst… jury still out on that Jimmy.

workingforpigs on September 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM

Just when you think Carter’s bunch has said and done the stupidest thing they come back and top it. THis suggestion is disgusting. Israel has no one and dammit I love under dogs. Stand up for Israel you spineless creeps!

Herb on September 21, 2009 at 2:27 PM

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 3:07 AM

International waters hmmm. Was that the 3nm or 12nm rule? Has the US signed a International Waters Treaty? I just did some brief googling and it looks like there was a lot of room for misunderstanding in 67 (even now). How would our peace loving hippies of 67 reacted to the US being involved in a International Waters dispute with Israel after the Gulf of Tonkin deal?

HA just recently had a post on LBJ tapes in which he says that he has the black vote locked up for 200 years because of him signing the Civil Rights Act. The Dems already had the Jewish vote locked up. He just had to figure out how to win Vietnam…

Would he have thrown away those 2 voting groups due to a “misunderstanding” at sea? He probably thought the Dems would never lose another election….

journeyintothewhirlwind on September 21, 2009 at 2:39 PM

……………

As nuclear reactor fuel is used, it turns into uranium 238, which has a half life of 4.5 billion years. These radioactive isotopes are dangerous to health because they emit alpha particles and because they are chemically toxic. When inhaled, they damage lung tissue. When ingested, they damage kidneys and cause cancer in bones and in liver tissues

According to a recent review of medical research, uranium exposure causes babies to be deformed or born dead.

Never in history has it happened that nuclear power plants and nuclear enrichment facilities have been deliberately bombed. Such facilities, everywhere in the world, operate under severe safety conditions because the release of radioactive materials is deadly, immediately and also long after exposure.

If Israel deliberately bomb a fully fueled nuclear power plant or nuclear fuel enrichment facilities, containment will be breached; radioactive elements will be released into the environment. There will be horrific deaths for families in the surrounding vicinity.

The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated 3 million deaths would result in 3 weeks from bombing the nuclear enrichment facilities near Esfahan, and the contamination would cover Afghanistan, Pakistan, all the way to India.

Bombing such facilities will require powerful explosives, earth penetrator war heads, maybe nuclear warheads. The explosions will blow the contamination high into the atmosphere. Where will it go is a question that is difficult to predict.

………The planet is not large. What goes around, comes around. Smoke from the Gulf War oil fires went around the world and was detected in South America. Radioactive fallout from bombing a nuclear reactor will also go far, especially considering that it has millions of years to make the trip.

Military forces in the Persian Gulf, in Iraq, and infghanistan need to wonder how expendable they are.

mags on September 21, 2009 at 10:40 AM

1) When reactor fuels are consumed they form a series of what are called decay products, mostly centered around Iodine-135 and Krypton-88, but only because those are the largest numbers of decay products, statistically. U-238 is consumed by the fission process, not a product of it. Until a reactor has been operated at higher powers for some amount of time, the amount of long term radioactivity enclosed remains low. After several months at higher powers, many fission products and some neutron activated corrosion products (like Co-60 and other more highly susceptible substances to neutron activation) will be produced. Most of these fission and decay products have half lives on the order ofdays or months, and some have half lives around 60 yrs or so. So within twenty years, the vast majority of all contaminated material will have decayed away and has no effect on human life. Yes there will be areas hich remain high, but not dangerously so for your immediate health.

2) An explosion involving a breach of the containment building (which Bushehr most certainly has in the photos I’ve seen of it), and then a further breach of the vessel containing the core, and then some kind of damage and melting of the fuel, probably from the bomb or from the failure to remove what is called “decay heat” from the fuel after the bombing cuts off the power and breaches the vessel and lets the cooling water boil off, would allow SOME fission products to be released. Tests on expended cores show that approximately 40% of the fission products are gasses and can be expected to be released when the fuel, vessel, and containment building all three are breached. If the core has operated for a long time (years), then these fission products are very radioactive, but also diffuse relatively quickly in the atmosphere. Unless the levels of radiation a person is exposed to are relatively high, the chances of sickness from radiation exposure is only one addiditional death from cancer in a population of ten thousand or so people. Very Low!!!!

3) When Chernobyl melted down, a very large reactor delivered up most of its fission product gasses to the atmosphere and the radioactivity traveled on the prevailing winds for a long way. However, no one outside the 33 firefighters involved in fighting the fire died immediately, or even in the next couple of days. They died after a month based on high exposures to the fission product plume emanating from the still burning reactor. No one died immediately from exposure to fission products in the hundreds of miles around Chernobyl and Pinsk. However, the higher levels of exposure appear to have led to several hundred additional cases of cancer in the residents of the area and immeidately under the radioactive plume for several dozen miles. All of those deaths were treatable and could have been countered by early warnings and approppriate screening of the exposed personnel in Pinsk and Chernobyl.

4) The bombing of Bushehr would most likely NOT allow as many fission products into the atmosphere as Chernobyl (where there was NO containment building). While the chances certainly go way up when you deliberately bomb a reactor, remember that you can stop plutonium production merely by completely destroying the electrical supplies to the facilities and ensuring they never get built again, and you will eliminate plutonium production at Bushehr. I would assume you could eliminate uranium enrichment at Esfahan almost the same way. These plants do not make their own electricity in sufficient quantities to continue running if you eliminate their ability to receive and transmit electricity to the outside area. Their emergency generators are for just that, emergency use, to cool the reactor, not keep it running at full power. While they make electricity to supply themselves, that is through a switchboard. Destroy the electrical switchboards and everything stops.

5) Plutonium-239 comes from the activation by neutrons of U-238. So you start a fission process, then put laregly unfissionable U-238 around the core to absorb excess neutrons and become Pu-239. Then you take out the Pu and use it to make bombs. It still has to be separated, centrifuged, formed and machined into bomb parts after it is removed from the reactor. So kill the fission before it makes enough Pu-239 and that bomb route is eliminated.

6)The location and direction of the wind will tell you quite closely where the radiation will go. The Argonne National Laboratory in the US produces just these kinds of studies and assessments. The hazards to the local population can be identified within hours and evacuations effected. And the planet is VERY large. The solution to pollution is dilution. What is very hazardous in large quantities is ALWAYS rendered less hazardous by spreading it out into smaller concentrations and neutralizing it.

7) The Union of Concerned Scientists is a leftist group of tree huggers who wish they could uninvent nuclear weapons. They never met a lefty cause they couldn’t spin facts to support, despite the laws of physics. Their estimates of the dangers of radioactivity has ALWAYS been overblown and based on unscientific estimates. They always make worst case scenarios seem like the most likely cases. I never believe anything they say after seeing what the true studies they quoted said. Birth defects are possible, yes. Higher cancer rates are possible, yes. All from higher exposure rates than those charlatans ever saw in their studies. There is currently a wealth of information from over 60 yrs of reactor operations in the US, with an amazingly low accident and health risk rate from radioactive exposure.

Bottom Line: Bombing the Iranians’ reactors can be done without breaching the cores, and if they are breached, presents an acceptable risk of exposure to the surrounding countries. Those Iranians near the facilties MAY be exposed to dangerous levels in the long term. Too bad. They should have insisted their country stop trying to build nuclear weapons. And if their country did the right thing, they can still be protected, even after the bombings.

Don’t disagree with all your points, but some things need clarification.

Subsunk

Subsunk on September 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM

Thank you subsunk for putting things in proper perspecive

alwyr on September 21, 2009 at 3:13 PM

Subsunk on September 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM

Great post.

infidel4life on September 21, 2009 at 3:45 PM

Lessee…Israeli Air Force vs. U.S. Air Force…far from a done deal I think, and a blood bath to be sure.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 21, 2009 at 5:09 PM

My question to the Jews in the U.S.:

Why on earth do you keep voting in these creeps?

I can’t find a reason. Maybe you can tell me?

Chaz706 on September 21, 2009 at 12:32 AM

“Aliyah” means making immigration (comming home)to Israel for Jews around the world. Aliyah from the U.S. in 2009 will be a record year. I want to thank Barry O. for his contribution in awakening the Jewish communities in the U.S. You have shown us that we need to be in Israel.

papabrody on September 21, 2009 at 5:43 PM

Subsunk on September 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM

That’s pretty freak’in impressive…where you you when I needed a good physics term paper…
Thanks,

right2bright on September 21, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Subsunk on September 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM

I would like to add my thanks for your very informative post.

The HotAir community rocks!

OldEnglish on September 21, 2009 at 6:31 PM

“Reverse Liberty” is the perfect motto for this, Jimmy Carter’s second term.

Biblically speaking, though, I wouldn’t want to the pilot–or the president who gave such an order.

Noel on September 21, 2009 at 6:40 PM

It’s not a bright idea to poke the God of Israel in the eye. I’m serious.

MCGIRV on September 21, 2009 at 7:27 PM

When you tar Poles the way you do, you dishonor the memory not only of Captain Pilecki, but also of other Poles such as Joseph and Victoria Ulma, who, along with their children, were executed by the Nazis for harboring Jews.

You are certainly welcome to find fault with Brzezinski, but don’t tar other Poles with the same brush.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 1:18 PM

I fail to see where I tarred Poles…

The connection was made (jokingly… and not a Polish joke) between Brzezinski’s name and the name the GERMANS’s assigned to “a portion” of Auschwitz… Berkenau. The translation from German to Polish of Berkenau is brzezinka… some kind of elm tree, I think, and similar to Brzezinski.

The connection I intended (and I think I made) was between Brzezinski and the Germans and their desire to kill Jews.

Please orrect me where I’ve gone off track.

CC

CapedConservative on September 21, 2009 at 9:52 PM

journeyintothewhirlwind on September 21, 2009 at 2:39 PM

The Egyptians demarked a 14nm war exclusion zone, and the Liberty was outside that. The Israelis never specified an exclusion zone. Read their report.

Israeli law itself recognizes a territorial water claim of 12nm in the Mediterranean, so, if we are to hold the Israelis to their own law, they attacked a ship outside their territorial waters.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 10:49 PM

HOW THE HELL DID HE AND THAT GANG OF JACKASSES EVER GET ANYWHERE NEAR THE WHITEHOUSE!?!
They all would appear to be outta their damned minds!
SuperCool on September 21,

Drugs. Lots of drugs,

and booze.

Remember friends don’t let friends drink n vote!

DSchoen on September 21, 2009 at 10:54 PM

Please (c)orrect me where I’ve gone off track.

CapedConservative on September 21, 2009 at 9:52 PM

1. Brzezinski is Polish

CapedConservative on September 21, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Regardless of any numbered element thereafter, you fell off the track on item 1, because you are about to manipulate a set whose elements are the entire Polish people.

It would help if you used Venn Diagrams to describe the various elements of your proof, along with their intersections. Then you can see the issue better — although you shift in later elements of your proof from the people of Poland to the territory of Poland, so the proof doesn’t hold water (that Brzezinski is anti-Semitic) very well anyway.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 10:58 PM

Zbig & Dhimmi: Midwives of the Iranian revolution and violent Islamism.

aaronscc on September 22, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5