Sounding off a little!!!!!!

Maybe waiting seven months before starting the investigation wasn't the right way to go morons. Did this moron think they were going to leave anything around? If U.N. inspectors really wanted to find something they should have forced Syria's government by threat if need be to look around the next day. Threaten with massive no trade bans anything to get inside. Does he think the world wants another terrorists supporting country to have access to nuclear weapons, Iran's enough. He can go off on Israel and the US all he wants but waiting seven months is just plain stupid. Like Syria wouldn't have found out through other countries governments in UN in the first place. That's why they weren't told in the first place is that hard to understand! China would have told Iran and Iran would have told Syria is that hard to figure out what a bunch of useless of morons. So now since they waited seven long months to get off there ass and do something now nothing going to happen to Syria! The United Nations is a waste and this Mohamed ElBaradei, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency is a ******* period. Sorry for going off like this but this is such useless crap. He waited seven months can't you believe it!!!!!!



Late U.S. tipoff hurts U.N. Syria probe: ElBaradei


Late U.S. tipoff hurts U.N. Syria probe: ElBaradei

Mon Jun 9, 2008 8:15am EDT
BERLIN (Reuters) - U.N. inspectors set to examine a Syrian site for signs of a secret nuclear reactor project may find little in part because of tardy intelligence-sharing by Washington, their chief said in remarks published on Monday.
But Mohamed ElBaradei, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said he still expected "absolute transparency" from Syria and the IAEA would insist on access to other sites which might be linked to the alleged reactor.
The IAEA began an investigation after receiving U.S. intelligence material in April, seven months after the purported reactor was destroyed in an Israeli air strike and seven years after Washington said the project began.
Syria denies the allegations. Satellite pictures taken since the bombing show the site was bulldozed and swept clean in a possible cover-up, according to nuclear analysts. Damascus has also rebuffed IAEA requests for wider access, diplomats say.
"We will do whatever is in our power to clarify (what the Syrians did)," ElBaradei told Germany's Der Spiegel magazine, referring to the June 22-24 investigative mission to be led by his deputy in charge of nuclear safeguards.
"I take these accusations very seriously. I demanded that our inspectors be able to establish a picture on the spot ... But it is questionable whether we will still find anything today, assuming something was ever there," he said.
"UNACCEPTABLE"
ElBaradei said no one had passed on suspicious information to the IAEA until well after the Israeli bombing "even though, as we now know, there was some already a year beforehand.
"Pictures of the plant and its destruction were first made available to us at the same time as to the U.S. Congress. That is unacceptable. I protested over this in the sharpest way."
Still, he said, "I expect absolute transparency from Damascus, also when it comes to other places where its components could have been delivered. If concerns remain, we will note these in our report."
Analysts say Washington chose not to release intelligence earlier because of the risk this might prompt Syria to retaliate against Israel, igniting a new Middle East war.
Damascus says Israel's target was a disused military building, whereas the United States says it was a camouflaged reactor designed to yield plutonium for atomic bombs.
ElBaradei also said Iran was evading "pressing questions" about intelligence reports that it clandestinely researched ways of devising a nuclear weapon.
Iran has said it is enriching uranium only for electricity, not weapons, and that its nuclear program will remain under IAEA monitoring. Iran's restrictions on U.N. inspections and history of concealing enrichment work has fanned suspicions.
"The situation is dodgy. Iran's (activity) is permitted (under nuclear treaties), but it sends a message to its neighbors and the whole world: we could build the bomb relatively soon, if we resolve to do so."
A May 26 ElBaradei report suggested Iran was making major progress developing and running centrifuges that enrich uranium.
(Writing by Mark Heinrich)



Link
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...080609?sp=true

Sorry who are we complaining about?

I am not sure its possible to do investigations on something until after you receive information that something is not right.

I guess it's how one may look at things. Couldn't the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency demand to see what the US had, after the news hit the press? It goes both ways he was no rush to deal with a messes situation either. I like his big words "he still expected "absolute transparency" from Syria and the IAEA would insist on access to other sites which might be linked to the alleged reactor." what BS. He still sat on his ass from April and done nothing and its already June so I guess wasting another almost two months seem like a good thing. I assume it was intelligence reason for not showing what was found or how it was found, or maybe knowing nothing would be done in the first place if it was shown. Again it's how you look at it.

MontyB you did make me think a little the other way on this I'll give you that.

The problem is making demands of the USA gets roughly the same response as making demands of any other country, they will tell you what they want you to know and nothing more.

There is a certain amount of hypocrisy when it comes to the middle east and nuclear weapons on one hand it makes sense to want open and transparent dealings with these nations but at the same time how can we remain silent about Israel's covert nuclear program.

The UN can not use force, it respects national sovereignty above all else, including human rights. The UN can not issue threats against nations like Syria, North Korea, Iran, Somalia, Myanmar, Sudan, etc. because they have already disconnected themselves from the world. Plus even when the UN Security Council does issue "resolutions" on issues it becomes quite difficult to enforce and really easy for a nation to simply say "try to stop me" and continue on with business as usual.

Monty, "covert" implies it's a secret. It's no secret that Israel has nuclear weapons, the real question is how many warheads did we give them?

Originally Posted by Damien435

Monty, "covert" implies it's a secret. It's no secret that Israel has nuclear weapons, the real question is how many warheads did we give them?

Damien, it would be secret if Israel had their own way however ole "what's his name" Vanunu blew that wide open. I dunno that the US actually "gave" Israel any devices, but I have no doubt that they were the source of much of the necessary information that Israel would have needed to perfect their triggers etc., without testing.

At the time it probably seemed like a good idea, but there's always the chance that Israel might "go feral" on the US. Not attack them, or even support the enemies of the US, but cease to take the advice of the US on Middle Eastern affairs. That could be rather "exciting" for the area.

Two out of three of you mentioned something about Israel and nothing about what Syria was trying to do? It's a pretty safe bet from what the US released that Syria was doing something very, very bad, shouldn't that be the issue? The US may have help or just watch Israel take out this target I have no way of really knowing. To me the focus should be on Syria for what they were caught doing right? For me at least I don't care how many warheads Israel has or who gave them to them and when, there a US allied and basically a stable government. Syria on the other hand supports terrorism and people strap on bombs that come from there country in one way or another. Very bad groups get direct funding and support from Syria/Iran to me "that's" the difference here. Some of these groups Syria doesn't or really can't control 100% and that's why I don't any of them involved in such a program in the first place. As MontyB pointed out the US didn't pass on they knew to the UN for some reason and I was wrong for jumping down there throats and going off and I'll take that on the chin. But Syria was doing something very bad and maybe next time there hide it better and get a little further. I was mad because it seems nothing going to happen Syria for trying to do this in the first place. Am I only person who thinks something bad might have come out of what they were doing? You all may know more on these such issues then I but the UN is pretty powerless in these situations. I'm just glad the target was taken out and assume it was what type of intelligence it was why it wasn't shared. We all know we can't show all of our cards and for these reasons I'm glad we don't. I don't care if it was a Syrian grandmother turn Israeli agent crawling the sand in the dark planting a homing device for the incoming strike. It matters if if was stopped. Next Syria should be held accountable for what they were trying to do because we know it wasn't to generate electric? For the good of the forum if changes need to be made in my first post PM me.

I don't really see Syria as a threat. Yeah,... they sh!tstir behind the scenes and keep the area unstable, but that's about the limit of their capabilities.

But I'm willing to listen if you can convince me otherwise.

rock45, you have to realize that "there a US allied and basically a stable government" is not a good enough reason in international politics. Israel's ambiguity about its nuclear program is of great concern to Israel's neighbors. It's hard to build a case against Syria, Iran, North Korea, and others when we are suspected of giving Israel enough material for at least a few bombs.

I just type out a long piece but changed my mind about posting it. I see we have different views about the Middle East. To disgust anything about this region involves religion and how people view such religions and what were taught since little kids about other religions is complex. Not being the greatest writer this isn't my strong suite to try and explain such a complex issue so I'll past. What I will say is the Middle East is about religion and oil for example. Exchange a Christen base country in the place of Israel but have them do every single thing the same, what would you think then? * There fighting to survive you'll almost root for them.
Imagine all the oil from the Middle East coming from South American, would Europeans or Americans even know where Iran was? * If it wasn't for there oil we wouldn't put up with there sh_t.

The Middle East is about religion and oil. Religion can be twisted to dislike or even hate who different from it's earliest forms and has caused most of the wars from the dawn of time and oil runs the worlds economy basically.