[home][about][contact] [getting involved] [Educational][Academic] [Media Watch][Views]
The vote, passed 401-11, effectively calls for a military attack on Iran when it obtains a “nuclear weapons capability” – an undefined term that, by some interpretations, could already apply to Iran, not to mention Brazil, Japan, the Netherlands, and any other country with a civilian nuclear program.
The president and the defense secretary were both talking about nuclear weapons, not the nuclear-weapons capability that the resolution emphasizes. The two are vastly different. Any state that uses nuclear technology has the potential for making nuclear weapons. The main point is to keep the potential latent, and in Iran’s case it has remained so.
Editor's note: On the issue of human rights we note the following. The warmongers camouflage their criminal intention to wage illegal aggression against Iran by duplicitous criticisms of the Islamic Republic with respect to democratic rights, but with their own records of crimes against peace, war crimes and serious abuses of human rights in Middle East, they are in no position to level charges of human rights violations by other governments. Their criticisms of other countries are hypocritically selective. Rarely do they mention the serious absence of democracy and abuses of human rights by their client states, whilst countries like Iran, because of their refusal to accept Western hegemony, are targetted for demonization to exploit any internal divisions for regime change.
The key weasel word now is “capability,” which is a very elastic concept since any work on nuclear research for peaceful purposeby Robert Perry (source: Global Research) February 17, 2012
The key weasel word now is “capability,” which is a very elastic concept since any work on nuclear research for peaceful purposes, such as low-level enrichment of uranium, could theoretically be used toward a weapons “capability.” ››read more