Nuclear Proliferation - Who Is to Blame? The Perpetually Debated Topic-Book Review

This is apparently one of the biggest topics of our time and indeed it has been for the last 50 years. Even today we see President Obama trying to negotiate and work out with the Russians a new nuclear proliferation Treaty, while each nation might reduce the number of Nuclear Weapons, Warheads, and delivery platforms in their arsenals. Obviously, it would only make sense for both nations if they did reduce the number, yet, any linear or one-sided agreement is sure to fail. So, will the new SALT Treaty go through?

Recently, there was an article in the Wall Street Journal titled; "Obama Launches Treaty Blitz" by Jonathan Weisman, in November of 2010. After reading this article, and thinking on the topic, it reminded me of a very good book I have on my bookshelf - that explains all sides to this debate. It explains the Cold War, the thinking behind it, and the massive buildup on both sides. It is a book I own, and remains on my shelf to this day. The name of the book is "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons - A Debate Renewed" by Scott D Sagan and Kenneth N Waltz, published by WW Norton and Company Incorporated, New York, New York, (2003), 222 pages, ISBN: zero - 393 - 97747 - one paperback.

Why is this book important you ask? Well, this latest version has new sections on India and Pakistan, the possibility of a terrorist getting a nuke, and the development of missile defense systems in Europe to protect the NATO nations. Not much has changed since this book was written in 2003, it contains all the same, and current topics, points of contention, common enemies, and the reality of the situation.

There are chapters on the challenges between India and Pakistan who both have nuclear weapons pointed at each other. And in this book both authors debate, one - that more nuclear weapons with more countries might prevent wars, due to similar strategies considered by the RAND Corporation of mutual destruction. The other authors suggest that more weapons only lead to more potential chances of one nation firing upon another, and a reciprocal response. I doubt anybody wants to see that.

Not long ago, I talked to an interesting person who was in the one of the military war colleges, and of course it is a big topic there, especially considering that any exchange of Nuclear Weapons will involve the United States, even if we are not in that war, we will be called upon to draw down the crisis, clean up the mess, and try to get those nations, whatever is left of them, to renegotiate with the world. This is a serious topic, and therefore this is a good book to help you understand the thinking behind it.

Lance Winslow is the Founder of the Online Think Tank, a diverse group of achievers, experts, innovators, entrepreneurs, thinkers, futurists, academics, dreamers, leaders, and general all around brilliant minds. Lance Winslow hopes you've enjoyed today's discussion and topic. http://www.worldthinktank.net/ - Have an important subject to discuss, contact Lance Winslow.

View the original article here

Nuclear Weapons and Terrorism - An Evil Mix

Some say that terrorists with nuclear weapons is not a matter of "if" but when, and that is enough to scare anyone. Perhaps, you'd like to learn a little more about just how serious this is. If so, let me recommend a very good book for you to read:

"Will Terrorists Go Nuclear?" by Brian Michael Jenkins; Prometheus Books (2008).
Mr. Jenkins, who also works with the RAND Corporation Think Tank, so he's pretty darn credible explains something most folks are not thinking about, and that is there is a huge difference between; Nuclear Terror" and Nuclear Terrorism or Nuclear Terrorists. You see, there are no actual nuclear terrorists today as far as we know, as no terrorist organization has a nuclear weapon(s). But that will surely one day change.
Will a terrorist organization use such a nuclear weapon once they acquire one, well, this is also unknown, but it stands to reason that they would, especially if they could set one off in a major Western world City or even Tel Aviv, Israel. Now there can be nuclear terror even if a terrorist organization has no nuclear weapon, just the thought of that, or such a group claiming to have one, is enough to terrorize folks.
Mr. Jenkins suggests that nuclear terror is already embedded in our minds and after 911, it seems rather believable, this is known by us and the terrorists. How would a group like Al Qaeda get a nuclear weapon, well what if Pakistan's government failed or was overthrown, it is known that Osama bin Laden's AlQaeda came very close to getting a nuclear weapon in 1990.
After the fall and breakup of Russia most everyone was concerned with all these Bio-Weapons scientists selling their knowledge and expertise to the highest bidder. A nuclear scenario along those same lines is more than plausible and unfortunately all too real in the present period.
Lastly Mr. Brian Michael Jenkins reminds us that nuclear deterrent is a much stronger incentive, than it would be for a nation to use it now as an offensive weapon. I recommend this book for anyone who cares about our National Security, ports, borders or our war on terror. Think on this.

Lance Winslow enjoys community philanthropy - Lance Winslow likes small business. Lance Winslow has also been involved in the Oil Industry; http://www.oilchangeguys.com/aboutus.shtml.

View the original article here

The Iran Threat - President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis

"'God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism.'-Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, October 26, 2005? (p. 25).

Alireza Jafarzadeh, former media director for the Washington, D.C., office of the Iranian parliament in exile, brings together published reports and his own inside "sources" to paint a scary picture of Iranian leadership and its intentions. He sees the surprise come-from-behind victory of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the 2005 presidential elections as a carefully orchestrated action by Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei to make "the presidency a zealous and aggressive mouthpiece for his radical Islamic agenda" (p. 28). (The 2007 book of course doesn't cover this year's disputed Iranian election.)

Much has been written about the "aura" Ahmadinejad said he felt surrounded him during his address to the United Nations in 2005. "I felt the atmosphere suddenly change and for those 27 or 28 minutes the leaders of the world did not blink... It seemed as if a hand was holding them there and had opened their eyes to receive the message from the Islamic republic."

The author sees Ahmadinejad's spirituality as "convoluted and hypocritical," and his escalation of speeches about "Iran's duty to prepare for the 'return of the Mahdi'" as "grasping at straws to survive" (p. 30). He says the Iranian economy "is in shambles" and that the Iranian leadership "has never been more vulnerable," but that doesn't make the apocalyptic rhetoric less frightening (p. 235).

"This is Ahmadinejad's manipulation of the concept that the Mahdi will return in a time of great turmoil; the rallying cry of 'nuclear rights' is Ahmadinejad's justification for creating an atmosphere of global turmoil to signify that the Mahdi will come soon..." (p. 31).

Jafarzadeh sees Iran as "ground zero for international terrorism" and the source of much of the unrest in Iraq. "In addition to sending Iranian operatives to enter Iraq posing as religious pilgrims, the Iranian regime has recruited an enormous network of agents within Iraq itself," he writes of Iran's intelligence network. "In July 2006 my sources in Iran uncovered facts about Iran's training and support of Iraqi militias" (pp. 61, 105, 108).

The author discusses the various approaches being used to address Iran's nuclear threat. The diplomatic option has not worked, and is even counterproductive in his view.

But he does not endorse the military option "because I believe that the Iranian nuclear threat should have an Iranian solution, conceived of and implemented by Iranian patriots with the support of the international community."

He also believes Iran's nuclear facilities would be very hard to hit with precision air strikes, if the West is even aware of the location of all of them. "Second, a military attack on Iran would change its image from that of antagonist...to that of a victim of western aggression." He also points out that Tehran would "reach out to its support base among terrorist states and Islamist terrorist groups throughout the Middle East" (p. 218)

Alireza Jafarzadeh's reliance on underground "sources" (he hadn't been back to Tehran since the summer of 1979) and his agenda for regime change in Iran cloud some of the conclusions of the book. However, this book gives some background to a major crisis in today's world.

Mike Bennett is the editorial content manager for the United Church of God Web sites (http://www.ucg.org/) and writes the blog "Forward to the Kingdom" (http://ucgmikebennett.wordpress.com/).

View the original article here