Mohamed ElBaradei: trying too hard
Where does Mohamed ElBaradei get off with his mock outrage and indignation over the Israelis bombing something or other in Syria and the US covering it up? It’s got to be for show, surely? He can’t be genuinely surprised. Where’s he been for the last six year?
Hey, Mohamed, two words: Hans Blix. Don’t tell us you don’t know what the score is, mate. If ‘being treated like a dick by Republicans’ isn’t in your job description you need to have a word with the UN’s Human Resources department and get it sorted.
ElBaradei wants to be careful. Much more of this and he’ll be getting a visit from a bunch of thickset gentlemen commenting what a nice International Atomic Energy Agency he’s got and what a shame it would be if it got broken. Just ask the likes of Jose Bustani. The worst thing you can do in that kind of job is your job.
Posted on April 26th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
| See also • Hey, what’s your name again? • Scary People in Important Positions • Viva El Presidente |
Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe By Email • Print This Post • • • |
|
Filed under T.W.A.T., US Politics |
Quote from the Independent article:
‘Mr ElBaradei also pointed out that, according to the information provided by the US, “the reactor was not yet operational and no nuclear material had been introduced into it”. According to a Western diplomat in Vienna, that meant that if the UN inspectors had been alerted earlier, they would have been able to verify the facts on the ground.’
Regarding the first sentence of the quote: Bizarrely, I’ve always thought that the best time to bomb a nuclear reactor in a rogue nation is before it becomes operational.
Regarding the second sentence of the quote: The UN inspectors are experts. They can shuffle through the rubble and determine whether the reactor presented a threat. Or they can look at the plans, assuming that Syria permits it, and come to conclusions without getting their shoes dirty.
But I do believe in honesty. If you have bombed a foreign country without warning, at least admit the fact. Explain why you did it (which does not necessarily mean that you give away secrets) and make yourself available for accountability.
Bizarrely, I’ve always thought that the best time to bomb a nuclear reactor in a rogue nation is before it becomes operational.
Which, unfortunately, makes it a bit late for anyone to do anything about Hanford, Oak Ridge, or Sellafield.
Bizarrely, I’ve always thought there were intermediate stages before we got to the bombing stage. But that’s me - just not go-getting enough.
Israel did something covert and the US tried to cover it up? Never!
Anybody out there seriously belive the Syrians would have let the UN inspectors in?
“the best time to bomb a nuclear reactor in a rogue nation is before it becomes operational.”
Can we have a new rule: anyone who uses the term ‘rogue nation’ to mean ‘people who the Yanks don’t like much’ is a neocon fuckwit who can fuck off?
PDF’s latest blog post… Stitching up a clown: not even funny
Quote from PDF:
“Can we have a new rule: anyone who uses the term ‘rogue nation’ to mean ‘people who the Yanks don’t like much’ is a neocon fuckwit who can fuck off?”
Thanks for analysing my political sense so wrongly in a single sentence,
Hi Justin. You assume that there were no intermediate stages before “we” (your choice of pronoun) got to the bombing stage. That’s your assumption, but who knows? The Syrian government is hardly likely to announce on Al Jazeera that they plan to build a bomb and here is our nice new reactor.
Just like John Major “never talked” with the IRA, the Israeli government “never talks” with the Syrian government. But they still “discuss issues” through third parties. For many years, Israel and Jordan were at loggerheads militarily, but simultaneously they discussed how to distribute the water supply from the river Jordan.
In the case of Israel allegedly bombing an alleged nuclear reactor in Syria, I guess that the national governments talked about it through intermediaries. Without UN involvement. And then Israel bombed the reactor. And thus I should End.
But whilst Ending, I have to say that diplomacy is not just the UN. It is about smoke filled rooms and sandwiches, outside the UN.
End