×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Stuxnet Allegedly Loaded By Iranian Double Agents

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the who's-to-blame dept.

Botnet 167

First time accepted submitter rainbo writes "According to a report from ISSSource, a saboteur who was likely a member of an Iranian dissident group loaded the Stuxnet virus on to a flash drive and infected machines at the Natanz nuclear facility. Iran's intelligence minister, Heydar Moslehi, said that an unspecified amount of 'nuclear spies' were arrested on ties to this attack. Some officials believe these spies belonged to Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK), which is used as the assassination arm of the Israeli Mossad."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

167 comments

from the who's-to-blame dept. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39666753)

Yeah, this is clearly done by some vigilance groups. There is nothing that would show US/Israel interest in this. Nothing at all!

Cheerfully yours from the nothing-happened department.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (5, Insightful)

Kreigaffe (765218) | about 2 years ago | (#39666797)

The US and Israel aren't the only countries that would rather Iran not be a nuclear power.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39666815)

And who are against them, other than US or those who lick US' asses? Both Russia and China support them.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39666943)

Call me old fashioned but I would rather lick US's asses than Iran's. Russia and China can have it, they're cesspools of countries anyway.

I pity the Geeks (5, Insightful)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 2 years ago | (#39667815)

As a geek myself, there are times I can't help but feel disgusted at the way they treat my fellow geeks

Who were the ones doing all the new inventions?

The Geeks

Who were the ones reaping the benefits of the new inventions?

The Investors

On the other hand, whenever things go wrong, who do they blame?

The investors?

Don't be silly, nobody will blame those poor investors who have lost their life-savings

They will of course blame the GEEKS for the failings

Like in this Iranian case

Who invented the nuclear thingy? Geeks

Who use this nuclear thing to blackmail the world? The Politicians

Who invented the Stuxnet virus?

The Geeks

But who order the Geeks to invent the Stuxnet virus?

The Politicians

Now, about those "Nuclear Spies" the Iranians rounded up - and we can assume very brutal torture, killing, etc included - because of the Stuxnet virus?

The Politicians? No, nobody would touch the politicians

They rounded up and torture the Geeks

It's the Geeks who are being blamed for everything and anything when things gone south, but yet, never get to reap any benefit when things go north, way up north !

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (5, Insightful)

demachina (71715) | about 2 years ago | (#39666997)

Saudi Arabia is probably as violently opposed to the Iranian's getting nukes as the Israelis. The Israelis have a large nuclear arsenal as a deterrent to Iran. The Saudi's don't have any deterrent of their own and would have to rely on the U.S. which could prove to be a fickle ally in a crisis, just ask Mubarak in Egypt.

The Iranians are Shia Muslims, the Saudis are Sunnis, the two hate each other with the passion you often find in long running sectarian conflicts.

There is a fair chance that if the Iranians get nukes the Saudi's will probably start developing their own to try to maintain the balance of power between Sunnis and Shia in the Middle East. The Saudi's getting nukes will probably not sit well with the Israelis.

The Middle East will become either more stable thanks to three way MAD or very, very dangerous, thanks to three fanatically religious countries, who really hate each other, are very close together and will have lots of apocalyptic weapons.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667123)

And when was the last time Iran attacked some other country? Compare this to Israel - Mossad killing people in other countries, and civilians killed in the process are no problem - or the US, which has been been in war with some country for pretty much their whole existence.

I consider US to be much larger problem against civilized, peaceful world than Iran's. Hell, just look at the maniacs in Texas!

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667279)

It is believed that Iran is behind Hezbollah which has been attacking Israel for years... there were also the recent attempted killing of embassy staff by what appears to be the Iranians.

Don't let semantics get in your war, a proxy war is still a war, despite not having actual classical armys on the ground.

That being said, I am not excusing Israel or America's actions in this situation, but Religious fanatics don't always foliow logic.

The Iranian people themselves are freaking awesome, I just can't stand their government.... actually, I can't stand most governments.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0, Troll)

yuje (1892616) | about 2 years ago | (#39668103)

Israel was hardly innocent in that conflict. Israel invaded southern Lebanon in response to the PLA having invaded there and used it as a base of operations to attack from. Israel then proceeded to occupy southern Lebanon for the next TWO DECADES, which also happened to have triggered the five-way civil war that pretty much tore apart the country, and continues to occupy a small strip of Lebanese land. Israel was also partially responsible for the notorious Sabra and Shtailla massacres during their occupation. Hezbollah was a Shii'ite (read, NOT Palestinian) militia formed during those years to combat the Israeli occupation. Wanting foreign invaders out of your country, or helping another people expel their occupies hardly requires religious fanaticism by any stretch of the imagination.

While Hezbollah has been accused of terrorism, for the most part they engage in military vs military combat, either as a conventional army or guerilla tactics, such as during the 2006 war, and they haven't been involved in suicide bombings since Israel left Lebanon. Some of their attacks, such as the rocket attacks during the 2006 war have hurt civilians, but their enemies are hardly innocent of that either and use tactics that, if done by non-countries, would be called terrorism. See the large amount of civilian damage in the bombings of Beirut, or assassinations of civilian Hezbollah politicians and leaders. Point being that the Lebanese were not the (initial) aggressors in the decades-long Israeli-Lebanese conflict.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39669807)

What did Iran have to do in a conflict between Israel (Jewish) and Lebanon (Christian)? Oh right, asserting its Shiite influence! I could refute every line you wrote but I don't think it wouldn't make any difference. You, sir, are a shill.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667301)

And when was the last time Iran attacked some other country?

Iranian agents regular attack people around the world, such as in Argentina: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_AMIA_bombing [wikipedia.org]

Iran has cannon fodder to do their dirty work (like Hizbullah).

and civilians killed in the process are no problem

In Iran's case, civilians killed in the process is the desired result.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (2)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#39667171)

The Iranians are Shia Muslims, the Saudis are Sunnis, the two hate each other with the passion you often find in long running sectarian conflicts.

By some accounts [mcclatchydc.com], the strife in Syria is a proxy for a general sectarian war.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (5, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | about 2 years ago | (#39667287)

By all accounts, sectarian war is also how Saddam Hussein took power and ran his regime. Saddam was a Sunni, as were approximately 20% of the Iraqi population; meanwhile, he gassed the Kurds and engaged in major terror operations against the Shi'a.

Arab society runs roughly thus: (sorry I can't paste the arabic script, Slashdot doesn't like it much):
Me against my brothers until a cousin comes;
Me and my brothers against my cousins until a neighbor comes;
Me and my brother and my cousins against the neighbor until a foreigner comes;
all of us against the foreigners.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0)

Ihmhi (1206036) | about 2 years ago | (#39668511)

"All of us against the foreigners" is practically the American motto these days... and I say this as an American. From "They took our jobs!" to "lol eurotrash" to "gotta kill all them ter'rists", we've got a really overinflated sense of nationalism. That is never a good thing. =|

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0, Troll)

Moryath (553296) | about 2 years ago | (#39667241)

Arab shill group accuses Mossad of being involved in something they don't like.

In other news:
Dog bites man.
Water is wet.
Sky is blue.
Republicans are racist.
Clouds primarily composed of water vapor.
Ratio of circumference of circle to radius = tau.
Nickelback is lame.

Wake me when we get some real news?

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (2)

Ihmhi (1206036) | about 2 years ago | (#39668525)

In other news:

Zionists control the media!

Dog bites man.

Zionist dog!

Water is wet.

Zionist liquid!

Sky is blue.

Zionist atmospheric conditions!

Republicans are racist.

Zionist Christians!

Clouds primarily composed of water vapor.

Working in concert with the Zionest atmosphere!

Ratio of circumference of circle to radius = tau.

Heathen Zionest mathematics!

Nickelback is lame.

We agree.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (3, Informative)

Simploid (1649955) | about 2 years ago | (#39668319)

"The Iranians are Shia Muslims, the Saudis are Sunnis, the two hate each other with the passion you often find in long running sectarian conflicts."

That statement is a bit misleading. The hatred and conflict is not because of Sunni Vs Shia, but rather Wahabi/Salafy Vs Shia where Wahabi sect is considered a subset of Sunnie Islam. The distinction is important because even though there is unease between Sunnie and Shias in general, but it's not at the level of hatred with passion.

Just thought to point that out

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668711)

I'm sorry. You're correct right up to your last sentence where you state that Israel is a "fanatically religious country". You're making intelligent arguments look bad.

Israel has a population of 25% non-Jewish. They are run by a secular democratically-elected government with an electorate selection skewed "against" the religious majority. They are a very small country which has not only not expanded it's borders through military might since its founding but shrunk it's borders. Their cities are under a near-constant rocket barrage and regularly (more regularly than earthquakes in California) have suicide bombers in their major cities which hold the Sharia brand of Islam in high esteem (the so-called 'radical Islamists').

They are a nuclear power. they have a conventional military which could take out the combined military force of several other countries in the region and still hold reserves - without touching the nuclear stockpile.

Calling Israel a 'religious extremist' country has about as much stock in reality as calling Twighlight an epic masterpiece of Kermit the Frog one of the best philosophers of the 18th century.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668825)

The Iranians are Shia Muslims, the Saudis are Sunnis, the two hate each other with the passion you often find in long running sectarian conflicts.

There is a fair chance that if the Iranians get nukes the Saudi's will probably start developing their own to try to maintain the balance of power between Sunnis and Shia in the Middle East.

Oh dear fuck, this narrative again?

Look, spend some time in the middle east. The Shia and Sunnis are no more at each others throats than blacks and whites or Christians and Jews in the good ole US of A. Sure, there's extremists just like in the US, and those extremists do some pretty fucked up things. And some shithead leaders stir the pot, but the shitstorms in the ME revolve around politics and money, just like anywhere else. And guess who stirs up the pot more than anyone else? That's right, the good ole US of A and her buddies. It's long been the policy of the TLA's to create sectarian divisions where there was none... hell, even the lines drawn on the map and the dictators propped up are done largely with that intent.
Your juvenile analysis may earn you some mod points here, but it just goes to show how little most people know about the ME. You're an idiot... now go do some research and perhaps take a trip to make yourself a little less so.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (1)

demachina (71715) | about 2 years ago | (#39669513)

"The Shia and Sunnis are no more at each others throats than. . ."

Actually they are. There is this place called Iraq where Sunnis and Shias spent much of the last decade ethnically cleansing their neighborhoods of each other, often by random killings and torture. Under Saddam a Sunni minority dominated and oppressed a Shia majority. After the first Gulf war the U.S. encouraged the Shia to rebel against Saddam, then the U.S. turned its back on them and Saddam slaughtered them. After the 2003 toppling of Saddam the Shia took power through the ballot box and have been exacting vengence on the Sunni and Bathist ever since. Iraq is now largely a Shia theocracy closely aligned with Iran which is pretty much the last thing the Saudis or the U.S. wanted. It dramatically enhanced Shia power in the Middle East. George W. Bush didn't think through the consequences of toppling Saddam at all, his dad did which is why he didn't topple Saddam in the first gulf war.

In Bahrain there is a Sunni minority which dominates and discriminates against a Shia majority, much like Saddams Iraq. The Shias launched their version of Arab Spring lobbying for more rights and more equality. It was an uprising that was brutally suppressed by the ruling Sunnis with the help of the Saudi Arabia which rolled tanks in to Bahrain to help. The Saudis were of the opinion it was an Iranian fomented uprising where Iranian provacateurs were encouraging the Shia in Bahrain to revolt.

In Syria the current civil war is largely Sunni's rebelling against an Alawite government aligned with Iran. Its another sectarian conflict which has lead to the deaths of thousands of people in the last year.

Sorry to say it. but you are the one that has no clue what you are talkling about.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (5, Interesting)

Xandrax (2451618) | about 2 years ago | (#39667083)

The answer to this question will become obvious if Iran gets nukes. If Iran goes nuclear, expect a number of Middle East countries to start taking steps to acquire nuclear weapons themselves, as a deterent to a nuclear Iran. These will be the same counties that didn't have an issue with not having nuclear weapons when Isreal was the only country in the region to have them.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667247)

And what's the problem with that? Do I need to remind you what country is the only one by far to ever used nuclear weapons, and against civilian targets no less?

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39669187)

How many wars has Iran instigated in modern history? Most arabs nations backed Iraq's invasion of Iran, they had the U.S. shoot a civilian aircraft out of the sky killing 260 Iranians (it's not a terrorist attack if performed by the U.S. of course), they've had Israel assassinate their people and airs strike their facilities, yet how many wars have they started?

Thinking they are evil and want to destroy the world is ignorant. The last thing they want is a war which they know they will lose, and lose badly. Look at history and try to see things from others' views. The Cold War almost became a nuclear war because both sides thought the other was insane and out to kill them.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#39667251)

Almost all their neighbors are against Iran having nukes. That was part of the fallout from the State Department emails leaked to wikileaks. A lot of the traffic was Iran's neighbors asking the US to please do something before that crazy fucker running Iran got the Bomb. I remember how when Israel converted Iraq's reactors to smoking holes in the ground their was some griping in the Media from Arabs but mostly they all just looked the other way. In fact I'm sure the countries they overflew on the strike were informed ahead of time. No one wants a nutjob living next to them to have Nukes cause even if he doesn't blow you up he's bound to try it on someone and the backlash is sure to cause fallout.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667307)

Russia and China may make noise in support of Iran in public. But do you really think either one of them wants to see Iran and Israel flinging nukes at each other, disrupting middle eastern oil production, and screwing up the whole world's economy? That outcome is, after all, where a nuclear-armed Iran leads. Russia and China may enjoy publicly poking a stick in the eye of the US, (And after all, after the bush presidency, who can blame them?) but they're not idiots. And they don't want to see nuclear war in the middle east any more than anyone else.

In fact, It'd be well within the capabilities and quite pragmatic of either of them to have secretly fired off stuxnet while publicly making nice with Iran. After all it's pretty much assured that the US and/or Israel would be blamed whether they really did it or not.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (3, Informative)

demachina (71715) | about 2 years ago | (#39668119)

Russia has absolutely no reason to care if oil production in the Middle East is disrupted. They are one of the world's largest oil and gas producers. If the Middle East blows up Russia, or rather Putin and the oligarchs running Russia, will get obscenely rich, more so than they already are.

Even if Iran does acquire nuclear weapons, and its very much open to debate if they are even trying, it doesn't follow at all that they would actually use them. Outside of the U.S. no one has ever used nukes, and its for a reason, they suck as actual weapons.

They suck because there are very few situations where you can use them where the consequences of using them wouldn't be worse than whatever problem you are facing. You use them and you become an instant pariah or you get incinerated yourself. If you are about to be overrun in a conventional war maybe you would use them as desperate last resort, but if you have nukes it unlikely anyone would have invaded you in the first place.

The only real value of nukes is as a deterrent, something that sits in a stockpile and is never used, but which discourages anyone from openly fucking with you, so they have to fuck with you through assymetric means instead. They are a pretty big win for countries like North Korea and Iran because they dramatically decrease the chances that a country like the U.S. which is increasingly fond of aggressive warfare and regime change won't fuck with you because it instantly becomes dangerous and messy invade a country with nukes.

If you have them and your adversary doesn't or you have massive nuclear superiority over your adversary they have a limited value in that you can try to bully your adversary using them as a threat but any adversary with any sense will call your bluff because they know you will never use them.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668533)

Russia has plenty of reason to care about nuclear war in the middle east. It's not so much the direct consequences of the reduction in the world's supply. It's the disruption to the rest of the world's economy that eliminating that supply would entail. The major economies of the world are too intertwined these days for one nation to stand back, watch the rest of the world burn, and not suffer at all internally. What is Russia going to do with their oil and natural gas surpluses if the rest of the world doesn't have the Dollars, Euros, or Yen to buy them?

The problem with the rest of your entire line of reasoning is that you assume that Iran is a rational actor that can be safely relied upon to act within its own best interests. It's not. It's a nation of extreme right-wing religious nutters that wants to wipe a people off the map or out of history (It doesn't matter exactly how the statement translates. Either way it's a clear euphemism for extermination.) for not believing in the same "god" as them.

Oh sure, they'll try to claim some kind of plausible deniability by having a nuclear bomb "go missing" and fall into the hands of "unknown terrorists". Do you think that will really pass muster with the people who will be in charge once Tel Aviv is vaporized?

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (1)

Gavagai80 (1275204) | about 2 years ago | (#39668591)

Russia and China oppose Iranian nukes -- obviously they prefer their nuclear club to remain exclusive and proliferation does not benefit them. They support Iranian nuclear energy, and oppose increasing sanctions on a country which has not even been proved to be perusing nuclear weapons, let alone actually built any yet. Russia and China prefer to wait until there's clear cause to apply punishment, perhaps realizing that a country which is punished because somebody thinks they're thinking about nukes has more to gain by actually making them so they can negotiate disarmament.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667051)

Ummm... In the region, the US and Israel are universally seen as the greatest threat to peace, not Iran.

Any informed, honest, observer would have to concur. Iran hasn't started a war in centuries. Israel regularly goes on murder binges (bombing of Lebanon, Operation Cast Lead [aka bombing civilians confined in an open air prison, killing hundreds of children], etc.) to boost the rankings of their politicians, and the US is currently involved in more wars of aggression than can be counted on a hand.

The fact that there is no evidence of a nuclear weapon program in Iran, and they have every right to a peaceful nuclear program as signatories of the non-proliferation treaty is also, apparently, lost on you. BTW, Israel is not a signatory of the non proliferation treaty, and Israel has an actual rogue nuclear weapons program that has produced hundreds of warheads that they have even tried to sell to pariah states like the apartheid government of South Africa in the '80s. The US is a signatory but has not lived up to its obligations to dismantle its stockpile of warheads.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668543)

Ummm... In the region, the US and Israel are universally seen as the greatest threat to peace, not Iran.

Any informed, honest, observer would have to concur. Iran hasn't started a war in centuries.

Really? I think the victims from the AMIA bombing would disagree with you. Also the thousands of Kurds killed by Iran, and the Israelis used as targets for Iranian missiles, which is what sparked the 2006 war.

BTW, Israel is not a signatory of the non proliferation treaty, and Israel has an actual rogue nuclear weapons program that has produced hundreds of warheads that they have even tried to sell to pariah states like the apartheid government of South Africa in the '80s.

Exactly, Israel is not a signatory of the NPT, Iran is, therefore it enjoys the benefits but also has responsibilities that comes with that.
As for your claim of attempting to sell nuclear warheads to South Africa, do you have any credible source for that or are you making that up too?

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (1)

akboss (823334) | about 2 years ago | (#39669175)

The US is a signatory but has not lived up to its obligations to dismantle its stockpile of warheads.

Really?? So the nukes they haul into Pantec and then dismantle are all fake? I swear some of you really need some Thorazine and then just chill out in the corner...

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (2, Insightful)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | about 2 years ago | (#39666933)

TFS doesn't outright say it but TFA is pretty clear -- the /vector/ was an Iranian. The /source/ was Israel. This isn't some attempt to pull wool over your eyes, dude. Chill.

Re:from the who's-to-blame dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39669517)

Yea they say that pretty clear. So what?
They've been saying that repeatedly, but I've yet to hear any more evidence than
"There's a reference to myrtus, which is the latin name corresponding to Hadassah which was Queen Esther's Jewish name"
That certainly doesn't seem like an airtight case, especially when the myrtle was significant in several cultures and the word can be parsed differently (MyRTUs) while being quite appropriate for the purpose.

They also say that this was the result of a conspiracy involving Sergey Brin, Larry Ellison, and Bill Gates. Sound plausible?

The Shareef Don't Like IT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39666791)

Nuke the Casbah!

Poor Slashdot... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39666903)

... is this what has become of you? Before you had interesting stories, interesting stories. Nerd or not, I really enjoyed reading you. Now you seem to publish only crap. But not just crap, tremendous crap. All your posts nowadays come down to anti-western, anti-system, political, Anonymous ball sucking crap. You are a tool, run by tools. What has become of you? Look at this story. The editorial sucks. It is clear that whomever wrote it is a tool. Even the site you point at? A crappy ass site with a crappy ass post with stupid conclusions based on thin air. And yet, you post this. Slashdot, what has become of you?

Re:Poor Slashdot... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39666989)

They need to do something. People are leaving. Saw this post earlier today: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2783085&cid=39663679 [slashdot.org]

Re:Poor Slashdot... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667093)

Just mod the truth down boys. Slashdot sucks because of you. As you are pests on modern societies, parasitic and yet always complaining, you are a pest in here too. It's all yours. Cheers.

No matter who it was (4, Interesting)

sqrt(2) (786011) | about 2 years ago | (#39666951)

No matter who was responsible, they pushed the world closer to war with that virus.

I'm not convinced by what we've seen so far, what little evidence there is, that Iran is producing nuclear weapons or wants to. Even if you could prove that to me, it wouldn't change my position that we shouldn't be involved in their affairs and have no right to punish or sanction a nation for doing the same thing we do. It's the US after all with the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons, and the only nation to have ever used them (we get sort of a pass since they were unprecedented at the time).

Iran is a sovereign nation and if they wish to produce nuclear weapons because they feel threatened by their neighbors (Israel, a nuclear power) or as a deterrent then that is their prerogative. Israel claims to feel threatened and vulnerable, that they're being menaced by Iran, yet they're the ones murdering scientists and sabotaging industries of other nations.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667065)

Russia has more nuclear weapons than the US, by number of warheads

Re:No matter who it was (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667097)

How about a pass because the Japanese Empire was a vicious and aggressive power that constituted a threat to the rest of the world, and that an invasion would have been easily ten times more costly in loss of life?

The Nazis may have a more identifiable ideology but there was in Japan as well.

Re:No matter who it was (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667233)

We will never know for sure, but there is historical evidence that points to Japan's imminent surrender even before the atomic bombs were used. They were already utterly defeated as a military power.

Whether the war continued on in name only on the home islands would have made little difference to the rest of the world. They had no further means to wage war from their archipelago; few natural resources to fuel a modern economy or war machine, and had lost a great mass of manpower. A naval blockade could have achieved victory without the use of nuclear weapons, or weapons at all.

Re:No matter who it was (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667863)

Oh fuck you. the Japanese killed 6 million people. They were losing the war for 2 years when we fought in Okinawa, an island 20x20mi, and it cost 85,000 US soldiers. Japanese soldiers weren't even allowed to turn and run when out numbered -- they fought, or they committed suicide. They weren't going to surrender -- it was against their culture to surrender. They were there serving the emperor... who they believe was divine, was descended from the gods, and was able to communicate with them. To surrender would have meant defying their culture, leader (in the military and the emperor), and their version of Jesus (for all intents and purposes).

And those people that died in the nuclear bomb? 1/4th were soldiers. and the civilians were working in factories manufacturing weapons.

So once again... fuck you. 6 million people. The Japanese were not victims. They deserved every bit of how it ended because of what they started. If there is such a thing as evil, the Japanese and their Nazi allies, were the closest example of it that we've seen in centuries.

Re:No matter who it was (4, Informative)

tomhath (637240) | about 2 years ago | (#39667941)

Japan's strategy is well known and probably would have succeeded if the US didn't have nukes. They knew a military victory was not going to happen after the Battle of Midway. From then on their goal was to make the war so expensive in terms of men killed that the US would negotiate a ceasefire. 6000 Americans killed on Iwo Jima in a month long battle, 12000 Americans killed on Okinawa in thee months. By then an invasion of the Japanese mainland was unthinkable; the Japanese were waiting for the US to sit down and negotiate when the two nukes were dropped. No US casualties, two cities incinerated; only then were they convinced that total surrender was their only option.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

sqrt(2) (786011) | about 2 years ago | (#39669023)

Couldn't we have just blockaded Okinawa and waited a few months for them to starve to death? They weren't going to get resupplied and the island wasn't self sufficient, was it? Or it wouldn't be with constant bombardment. They wouldn't be growing crops on the surface. I know they had extensive cave systems but they weren't growing food down there. Even if they had stores, they wouldn't last forever. We could have just waited. We lost all those men by choice. Maybe it was the right choice, but we could have just blockaded and bombarded every island. Even the home islands.

Re:No matter who it was (1, Informative)

caladine (1290184) | about 2 years ago | (#39667119)

Iran is a sovereign nation and if they wish to produce nuclear weapons because they feel threatened by their neighbors (Israel, a nuclear power) or as a deterrent then that is their prerogative.

Not exactly. Iran is a signatory of the NPT.

Article II: Each non-NWS party undertakes not to receive, from any source, nuclear weapons, or other nuclear explosive devices; not to manufacture or acquire such weapons or devices; and not to receive any assistance in their manufacture.

It's their prerogative to do so should they first decide to withdraw from the NPT, similar to what North Korea did.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

sqrt(2) (786011) | about 2 years ago | (#39667433)

It's their prerogative to do so should they first decide to withdraw from the NPT, similar to what North Korea did.

That was what I meant. Curious that so many people didn't seem to understand that it would work that way, and that they'd be within their right as a sovereign nation to decide which treaties they'll be party to.

As it stands, they are party to that treaty, and are complying with it.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

caladine (1290184) | about 2 years ago | (#39668433)

That was what I meant. Curious that so many people didn't seem to understand that it would work that way, and that they'd be within their right as a sovereign nation to decide which treaties they'll be party to.

This is /., you should know better! Iran should not, however, expect such a move to come without repercussions.

As it stands, they are party to that treaty, and are complying with it.

Sort of.

Article III: Each non-NWS party undertakes to conclude an agreement with the IAEA for the application of its safeguards to all nuclear material in all of the state's peaceful nuclear activities and to prevent diversion of such material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

Iran has fun flaunting this one. See also: Natanz, Fordo

Re:No matter who it was (4, Insightful)

PPH (736903) | about 2 years ago | (#39667135)

Yeah, maybe. But keep in mind that Ahmadinejad and Khamenei aren't beloved by even a majority of their own people. Look at the reaction to their latest presidential election. It doesn't take a large leap of faith to believe that there are probably a lot of Iranians who don't want this government to succeed. Or have nukes.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

frosty_tsm (933163) | about 2 years ago | (#39667185)

No matter who was responsible, they pushed the world closer to war with that virus.

I'm not convinced by what we've seen so far, what little evidence there is, that Iran is producing nuclear weapons or wants to. Even if you could prove that to me, it wouldn't change my position that we shouldn't be involved in their affairs and have no right to punish or sanction a nation for doing the same thing we do. It's the US after all with the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons, and the only nation to have ever used them (we get sort of a pass since they were unprecedented at the time).

Iran is a sovereign nation and if they wish to produce nuclear weapons because they feel threatened by their neighbors (Israel, a nuclear power) or as a deterrent then that is their prerogative. Israel claims to feel threatened and vulnerable, that they're being menaced by Iran, yet they're the ones murdering scientists and sabotaging industries of other nations.

Right now there is something of a balance between the powers that have nuclear weapons today. Iran's unpredictable nature and history of supporting terrorists poses a risk to the balance.

Speaking of WWII, 1) Germany would have used it if they attained it (their research didn't get that far) and 2) less Japanese died due to the bomb. A land invasion of Japan would have made Iwo Jima and Okinawa look like a cake walk for both the Allies and the Japanese as the Japanese population would have fought on until very few remained. Also, as horrifying as the bomb was fire bombing Tokyo and Dresden killed just as many.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

bmo (77928) | about 2 years ago | (#39667551)

Right now there is something of a balance between the powers that have nuclear weapons today. Iran's unpredictable nature and history of supporting terrorists poses a risk to the balance.

There is a solution to this.

Make it crystal clear and publicly, in no uncertain terms, that a nuclear detonation by a hostile country in any country allied with us or even merely friendly to us, or in our own country, the US, will be met with corresponding or superior-in-number nuclear detonations in their country.

In short, bring back MAD.

You want to play with the big boys and play with big boy toys? Play by the big boy rules or stfu and gtfo.

--
BMO

Re:No matter who it was (4, Informative)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | about 2 years ago | (#39667197)

There's a lot wrong with your remark. First of all, Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons [wikipedia.org] so attempting to research or build nuclear weapons is a direct violation of their treaty obligations.

Second, the large US stockpile is a concern, and the US is (correctly) taking steps to reduce the size of that stockpile (indeed has been for the last twenty years, in cooperation with Russia which has done the same to their stockpile). But the US weapons (in addition to being under treat compliance) are very tightly guarded and have many safeguards against accidental or malicious use. There's no such guarantee that Iranian weapons would be that way, and likely wouldn't be.

Third, your remark about Israel doesn't reflect the actual geopolitical situation. Despite Israel and Iran not even sharing a border, Iran is one of the largest funders of Hezbollah and other groups which systematically engage in attacks on Israel. http://www.cfr.org/iran/state-sponsors-iran/p9362 [cfr.org]. In that context, Israel being afraid of what Iran, or elements in the Iranian government, would do with nuclear weapons makes sense. As for sabotaging industry- it is Iran, not Israel which refuses to recognize Israel's existence. At this point, Israel has peace treaties and functional relations with Egypt and Jordan (and a decent amount of tourism between the countries and commercial exchange). Israel is not on good terms with Syria, but they've at least had limited dialogue. Iran is pretty much the only country in the region which has both continued to sponsor attacks on Israel and has never sat down at the negotiating table. While one can argue that there's a large history of hostility and menacing on both sides, the essential facts are that Israel has sat down and signed treaties with other nations in the area, and Iran has never shown any indication or willingness to ever sit down. Israel is not at all blameless in the current situation, but it is Iran's belicose government that is the essential reason that Israel is concerned, quite legitimately, over Iranian nuclear ambitions.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667303)

so attempting to research or build nuclear weapons is a direct violation of their treaty obligations.

Your trying to confuse the situation.
There is NO proof Iran is attempting reasearch into, or building nuclear weapons.

Here are some more facts you might not like:
1. Iran's formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod facility underscores that Iran is playing by the rules of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Iran has signed.
2. Iran allows IAEA inspections of all its facilities.
3. The IAEA and all 16 United States Intelligence Agencies are unanimous in agreement that Iran is not building and does not possess nuclear weapons.
4. Israel refuses to sign the same treaty Iran has signed.

Re:No matter who it was (2)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | about 2 years ago | (#39667337)

It isn't confusing an issue when the person I'm responding to said "Iran is a sovereign nation and if they wish to produce nuclear weapons because they feel threatened by their neighbors (Israel, a nuclear power) or as a deterrent then that is their prerogative." Context matters.

Re:No matter who it was (4, Insightful)

Tancred (3904) | about 2 years ago | (#39667497)

sqrt(2)'s brought up production of nuclear weapons.
You (JoshuaZ) had a good point about the NPT in response to that.
AC had a good point as well that there's no evidence of weapons production, though the charge of trying to confuse the situation falls flat given what you were responding to.

If the roles were reversed, I think the U.S. would be trying to develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent. Imagine Iran having the huge stockpile of nuclear weapons and being the only country having used them. Imagine Iran having overthrown the U.S. democratically elected government decades earlier. Imagine that over the last decade or so, they've invaded and set up new governments in Canada and Mexico. And finally, over the last few years, the drumbeats of war have been getting louder, with prominent voices calling for bombing the U.S.

Sadly we are sure (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668093)

There is plenty of evidence of nuclear weapons production. It's just that nobody wants to believe this while there is a one-in-a-trillion chance to deny it.

1) Their only nuclear reactor is an old design heavy-water reactor, while it is known they have designs for better ones
2) It is flanked by a building known to have an 8000 enrichment cascade
3) It's producing radiation that proves that they're producing large quantities of tritium
4) It doesn't have a decent power connection to the Iranian grid

1-2-3 combine, to anyone who has a basic introduction to nuclear technology, to proof that they're producing significant quantities of weapons-grade uranium and/or plutonium. But it's not a smoking gun.

ALL 4 are violations of the NPT by themselves. So sadly that's one thing we're absolutely sure about : Iran signed the NPT, and doesn't abide by it. Does that necessarily mean they're producing a nuclear weapon ? No. But it means that Iran respects the NPT only in words, and violates it in deeds. They further violate it by refusing full access for international inspectors with measurement equipment.

Could they be producing medical isotopes ? No, this doesn't require enrichment cascades, never mind ones that are that long. Research isotopes ? Again, doesn't require an enrichment cascade. Besides, why would they want to produce large quantities of either ? Nobody else does.

What may yet protect us is the way nuclear science is taught. Their data necessarily must mostly come from Iranians who studied abroad. Academics do sabotage this. If you buy books, or even restricted materials about weapons-grade uranium production, you'll find they're wrong. Except this is not a coincidence. Anyone in a course about this, whether in Canada, US or Europe will be told in class what a few of the mistakes are but not all of them, and they'll be told why they do this. If you follow the instructions academics teach, it won't work. You'll be generating radiation that ionizes the vaporized uranium, preventing it from crossing the enrichment chamber. You'll be taught to set them up so the uranium hits the wall of the enrichment chamber instead of the line that's supposed to take away the enriched material, the value for the electric field of a uranium atom listed in every mendeljev's table is a lie and there's several other problems with the designs of the equipment. Furthermore, the bomb production materials that leaked also contain a configuration that won't work. Well, it'll work enough to merge the bomb material with the nearest wall, making sure you have to restart from scratch, but it won't actually start a fission cascade. So presumably this is stopping them at least for the moment.

At some point, they'll have redone all the experiments that matter though, and found the errors, just like North Korea did. Let's hope their scientists are sane enough to keep teaching everyone the mistaken version, and just have the correct values and methods in their mind and nowhere else.

But you can be sure about one thing : Iran is trying to produce a weapon, this is blatantly obvious and denying it is moronic. It is only a matter of time until they get it if they just keep at it.

Re:Sadly we are sure (1)

Tancred (3904) | about 2 years ago | (#39669111)

You seem much more sure than the IAEA. Are you suggesting they're incompetent or not telling us the truth? I'm not denying they're working on weapons but I haven't seen the evidence. Evidence in this case meaning conclusions by trusted experts (not unsupported claims from an AC). But again, we would probably be working on weapons if we were in their shoes.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667729)

Number of things the war heads are much more effective and the US military is not exactly truthful about it's agenda or capabilities.

Re:No matter who it was (2)

Lehk228 (705449) | about 2 years ago | (#39668157)

iran's current government did not sign that treaty, the now deposed government did, though they should formally withdraw if they do decide to build nukes

Re:No matter who it was (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668167)

"First of all, Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty" yeah because the USA has a great history on its obligations with things like the Geneva Convention and even it's own Constitution. It's just like the South Park episode 'Simpsons did it'... any fingers you want to point can be replied with 'USA did it'. Overthrow democratically elected leaders and countries 'USA did it' drop nukes on another country 'USA did it' smuggle drugs to fund black ops 'USA did it' spy on its own people 'USA did it' put LSD in other countries drinking water 'USA did it'. Lie about WMD to its people and allies to justify a war 'USA did it'. Until the USA sorts its sh*t they should stop pointing fingers. As for Israel they need to get over this seige mentality and realise they are the agressor.

Re:No matter who it was (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667213)

You seem to have trouble distinguishing cause from effect.

It seems to me that first: without the threats that it has made against Israel and their nuclear program, that they would have no need to feel threatened by Israel (which is, in fact, not their neighbor). Any fear that they might have of actions by Israel is a result of their actions, not a reasonable cause for their actions.

On the other hand, Israel's fear of Iran is a logical result of Iran's actions, and their actions (assassinations and sabotage) are a logic result of that fear. These actions are a result of what Iran is doing, not a cause for it. And I strongly suspect that absent Iran's rhetoric and actions (including support of Israel's sworn enemies who are neighbors of Israel), that Israel would have no reason to have any ill feelings towards Iran.

Re:No matter who it was (4, Insightful)

sqrt(2) (786011) | about 2 years ago | (#39667347)

They are within striking distance of regional weapons. When Israel has nuclear weapons, missiles, and planes to deliver them, they can be considered neighbors.

Also, Israel seems to think they have a right or responsibility to stop Iran from developing any nuclear technology, peaceful or otherwise. If they were developing nuclear weapons that might even make them justified in certain cases, but so far we have no proof of that. They have absolutely no right to sabotage peaceful nuclear power production, and so far that's all Iran has been doing.

Israel will have ill-feelings toward Iran regardless of what Iran does because Israel is run by a group with the biggest persecution complex in the world--largely justified. Anything but fawning obsequiousness is taken as hostility. Look at the incredibly small movement away from Israel that the US has made in its foreign policy. The hardliners compare Obama to the appeasers of Hitler for having the audacity not to be completely in lockstep with Israel.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

stevenfuzz (2510476) | about 2 years ago | (#39667321)

Nuclear weapons for all! As humans we have the natural right to walk around with nuclear weapons sticking our of our pants at attention! Hell, let's send some to Nigeria. How about Nuclear weapon day, where we all paint cute bunnies and write all over them with things like "Human sovereignty, where my nuclear exposition is like way bigger than yours".

Come on bro, there has to be a limit to this kind of right-wing no government bs that you are trying to sell to me for an apocalypse and terrible hat fashions. If you can create a device which threatens humanity, than humanity has a right to band together and deiced not to allow it.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

rtb61 (674572) | about 2 years ago | (#39667807)

That of course is the lie. Nobody is talking about banning nuclear weapons, no action is being taken against countries who have them, no sanctions are being applied to hoarders of them and nothing being done about countries who lie about and hide their existing weapons.

Nope this is about Iranian oil, the US military Industrial complex and the Israeli's government desire to dominate the middle east.

What is being done or said about the Israeli nuclear stockpile currently at between 200 and 300 warheads, obviously that number would indicate their use is for targets well beyond the middle east, what are those additional targets.

Sorry but the rule is, if you have nuclear weapons than you do not get a seat at the nuclear non-proliferation table and you should already be facing sanctions. Weapons designed to irradiate, blow up and then set on fire every man, women, child born and unborn in a geographic region and then render that region uninhabitable, already set you and yours apart from the rest of humanity.

In this case Israel has done everything possible in order to make Iran feel threatened by imminent attack up to and including the use of nuclear weapons. Israel has been the driver of violence in the region. As for the US, their efforts are a joke, they are just Israel's whipping boy sent stumbling from pillar to post by Israel control over US elections, with blatantly corrupt campaign contributions and treasonous mass media attacks.

The US itself triggered off unclear weapon proliferation when they promoted 'FIRST STRIKE' use of nuclear weapons. This specifically designed by the US military industrial complex to promote the proliferation of nuclear weapons so that more money will be spent on the defences against them.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667365)

MAD only works if the person with the finger on the red button isn't a loon and thinks that they will be rewarded in the afterlife for killing alot of infidels even if it means all of their people die too. I trust the Iranian people but I don't trust the religious zealots in charge.

Ironic my word was warfare for submittal

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668117)

Now imagine how we feel about the USA because I'm fucked if I can see the difference.

Wait I can. The USA HAS killed lots of infidenls!

Re:No matter who it was (1)

hsalstond (2614997) | about 2 years ago | (#39668135)

I don't think anyone would argue that Stalin or Mao were sane. Like so many leaders, they were homicidal psychopaths. MAD seems to have worked even despite insane leaders.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

rgbrenner (317308) | about 2 years ago | (#39669747)

Stalin left office in 52. And China did not have ICBMs capable of reaching the US until the 2000's... about 20 years after Mao died.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667387)

Iran is a sovereign nation and if they wish to produce nuclear weapons ... then that is their prerogative

False.

Iran, a sovereign nation, has voluntarily signed (and reaffirmed multiple times) a treaty stating they will NOT produce nuclear weapons, AND will declare fully all their nuclear activity, AND agree to serious punishment if they don't live up to their obligations.

Iran has repeatedly violated the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and suffer the consequences of their actions.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667409)

Do you have proof that Iran has violated the non-proliferation treaty (they haven't, BTW, the US government says so and so does the IAEA) or are you just parroting what you've heard from right wing radio?

you have it backwards (3, Informative)

schlachter (862210) | about 2 years ago | (#39667465)

They pushed the world further from war. Because various countries are able to sabotage and assassinate to slow down the Iranian nuclear project...an all out military option has not be used as of yet. You can bet your ass...that there would have been one by now had there not been options like Stuxnet.

Re:you have it backwards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39669207)

Why would Iran start a war with Israel? They know they would lose.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667651)

> I'm not convinced by what we've seen so far, what little evidence there is, that Iran is producing nuclear weapons or wants to.

Sure, a totalitarian, theocratic country with 15% of all the oil reserves in the world (100 years worth of production) just wants a little more peaceful energy, right? Seems totally legit.

Re:No matter who it was (1)

sqrt(2) (786011) | about 2 years ago | (#39667761)

So they should just squander it all right now as fast as they can? Burn up a resource that has many other uses than energy when there are alternatives?

That's the kind of thinking that is dooming mankind.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667839)

Evidence please that Israel murdered scientists.

Meanwhile, Iran was caught red-handed bombing Israeli diplomat families a few months ago. Strange you don't care about that.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668607)

Who else was doing it, aliens trying to promote peace on earth? Iran's retaliation was justified.

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668877)

They were never caught redhanded. It was never proved they were related to Iranian government. Exactly reverse those incidents were so stupid that it questions their relation to IR.

They were most probably related to MKO terrorist organization which fights with Iranian government (and used to fight under Saddam's flag against Iran).

Re:No matter who it was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668519)

You get sort of a pass? WTF man. Tell that to the millions that died because of it, OH we didn't know it was going to be _THAT_ bad.

Jesus fucking christ you Americans are DELUSIONAL.

MEK (4, Informative)

Tancred (3904) | about 2 years ago | (#39666983)

The same MEK that's on the U.S. terror list, and yet openly supported by several high ranking figures in national politics.

Re:MEK - trained in Nevada (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668887)

by Joint Special Operations Command
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/4/6/headlines/hersh_us_trained_iranian_terrorist_group_in_nevada

TL;DR: (1)

nimbius (983462) | about 2 years ago | (#39666999)

israel probably did this, and they went to great lengths to make sure it was clandestine. we all know the horrible political repercussions israel would face from america if it were caught doing something as nefarious as killing scientists or hacking into power plants in a foreign nation with the largest minority jewish population in the middle east.

its absolutely imperative that countries like iran be restricted access to develop their own power plants with their own fuel. they may divert their nuclear program for nefarious intent, like breaking away from western plutocratic foreign policy. a nation with more residents than the country of england couldnt possibly need nuclear fuel for medical imaging devices or academic research.

Re:TL;DR: (2)

deanklear (2529024) | about 2 years ago | (#39667203)

israel probably did this, and they went to great lengths to make sure it was clandestine. we all know the horrible political repercussions israel would face from america if it were caught doing something as nefarious as killing scientists or hacking into power plants in a foreign nation with the largest minority jewish population in the middle east.

The same America that did nothing when they bombed Iraqi nuclear facilities in 1982 [wikipedia.org]? The same America that bombed those same facilities in 1991?

Why do you think we support Israel in the first place? We can train and equip them, and everyone once in a while they'll invade a non-aligned country, or carry out assassinations of suspected terrorists without having to get our hands dirty. They are a military client state that exists, for us at least, expressly for the purpose of carrying out matters of American national interest, including murdering people that we don't like.

"On occasion, scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that's a wonderful thing, candidly... I think we should send a very clear message that if you are a scientist from Russia, North Korea, or from Iran, and you are going to work on a nuclear program to develop a bomb for Iran, you are not safe."

--Rick Santorum

Re:TL;DR: (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#39667421)

I don't doubt that Israel has killed a lot of people involved in the Iranian Nuclear Program. Nations generally operate from an "The end justifies the means" kind of position. They'll need to kill many, many thousands more to catch up to what Iran's rulers are doing to her own people though. If you wonder what I'm talking about just wander over to Amnesty Internationals page. Israel has had the bomb for a few decades now and has used it primarily as a deterrent to invasion. I doubt that Iran with a nuclear arsenal will be that limited. I sincerely hope that if Iran does develop the bomb that both China and Russia will reap what they've sown.

Plausable deniability (1)

shuz (706678) | about 2 years ago | (#39667053)

This story is politically charged and what is never reported is how China and Russia, for the most part, do not have governments that accurately reflect the views of the majority of its' citizens. Much can probably be said about many if not most of the governments in the world. The USA for instance is a very diverse nation culturally and ideologically. It would surprise me greatly if the average Iranian wanted to cause a military nuclear device to be set off in another nation anymore than the average person in the USA. As far as Israel, what I really fail to understand is what reason any Muslim would want to damage the landscape. There are many locations within Israels borders that are considered holy to Muslims, Christians, and Jewish. Beyond that setting off a nuclear device in Israel would have extreme negative consequences for many surrounding Islamic nations! The only reason I can see to not allow a country to have Nuclear warheads is if that country has proven to the world that they are led by mentally unstable leaders that have shown that they don't have respect for their own people. I am not in a position to pass judgement on individuals in other countries without directly interacting with them. So I can not comment on Israel's or Iran's leaders.

MEK are Iranians willing to fight the Mullocracy. (0)

couchslug (175151) | about 2 years ago | (#39667059)

Good luck to them. Peaceful methods have no effect, but the MEK alone have the courage to fight to the death.

Re:MEK are Iranians willing to fight the Mullocrac (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39668907)

You are a full blown moron.

MKO has assassinated hundreds of even normal people in Iran. It is no much different than AlQaeda. They are Marxists which used to perform forceful abortion on the women in their camp. They used to fight under Sadam's flag and killed large numbers of anti-Sadam Iraqis in Iraq.

people like you created Taliban in Afghanistan and thought they will just fight who US wants, but suddenly they bombed US.

Ripped off (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667073)

I bet Iran feels gyped and/or jewed out of its nuclear research.

Cheerleading is becoming challenging (1)

macraig (621737) | about 2 years ago | (#39667095)

Damn, it's getting so hard to figure out who to cheer now. Who exactly are the good guys again? Who is my team? I can't tell any more.

Re:Cheerleading is becoming challenging (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667595)

America. America is always the good guys, because we're always the good guys.

Obviously.

1.5 Million Jews in Iran (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667183)

Israel has lots of operatives in this population.

If Israel used a New York Jew to assassinate a US sitting president, it would still be Israel that assassinated the president, even if the US born Jew called himself a member of AIPAC or some such.

Assassination arm of Mossad? Srsly? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667229)

MEK is an organization of militant Islamic, Iranian leftists guerrillas. There are certainly a reasonable number of conspiracy nuts taking a break from their '9/11 was a Zionist Conspiracy using planted charges supplied by aliens' tirades who claim an association between them and Israel. But describing them as the assassination arm of Mossad seems to be a stretch based on the current available facts. If there's a clear tie - is there somewhere we can read about it? The conspiracy bloggers make my head hurt.

Re:Assassination arm of Mossad? Srsly? (1)

tokidokix (1833610) | about 2 years ago | (#39668819)

I have no mod point but if somebody can, please mod this up. Writing that the MEK is an assassination arm of the Mossad is just repeating Iranian government propaganda. They are a Marxist movement that was fighting the Shah before the revolution and has been forced into exile by the islamists after the revolution. As one of the political opponent of the islamist government in Iran, they may have received support from countries opposing the iranian government (although I am not aware that they ever received specific help from Israel). But they are certainly not affiliated to Mossad.

They have sponsored violent actions in the past, but they are not considered a terrorist movement in Europe anymore ( although they still are in the US)

What next? (0)

amightywind (691887) | about 2 years ago | (#39667451)

War with Iran is inevitable. The US cannot allow those muslim lunatics to possess a nuclear weapon.

Re:What next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39669263)

How about Christian Lunatics which have killed at least 50 million in recent century?

WTG Israel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39667653)

Hit them hard, hopefully u can infiltrate again!

Witch Hunt? (3, Informative)

sl3xd (111641) | about 2 years ago | (#39667879)

Is stuxnet now being used as an excuse for a good ol' fashioned witch hunt? Just accuse your workplace foes of espionage, get them hauled away, and step into the guy's shoes with a pay raise?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...