www.transicionestructural.NET es un nuevo foro, que a partir del 25/06/2012 se ha separado de su homónimo .COM. No se compartirán nuevos mensajes o usuarios a partir de dicho día.
0 Usuarios y 7 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
Submitted by James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,As Reuters reported last week, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, has confirmed that while the Iranian government is still enriching uranium at an increasing rate, there is no evidence of a weapons program under development. Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei still maintains that the nuclear program is entirely peaceful. According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, senior Obama administration officials say the 2007 intelligence report which confirmed that Iran’s government put a stop to its efforts to create a nuclear bomb in 2003 is still accurate. Just last February, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta also confirmed that the government is not pursuing a weapons program.The nonexistence of a nuclear weapons program hasn’t stopped the neoconservatives in Congress and the press or the Obama administration from denouncing Iran publicly in the name of American hegemony. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney remains willing and eager to use military force to halt the country’s nuclear development. At a speech before the Veterans of Foreign War convention in July, Romney called the prospect of Iran having a nuclear weapon the greatest “danger in the world today” and castigated President Obama for not doing more to stop the continuing enrichment. The Obama administration hasn’t been sitting idly by however when it comes to Iran. Under pressure from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, perhaps the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington, Obama signed into law the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act in July which would give “a blank check drawn on the U.S. taxpayer” to Israel “to maintain its qualitative military edge” according to former CIA officer Philip Giraldi. With Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu playing a game of nuclear blackmail with the White House in an effort to goad Obama into launching a preemptive attack on Iran, U.S. National Security Director Tom Dinilon reportedly presented an attack plan to the war-ready Netanyahu recently.Should Netanyahu pull the trigger and strike Iran before the U.S. elections as he is rumored to be determined to do, it is highly likely that both President Obama and the U.S. Congress will come to the rescue by ordering the deployment of the military. The Israeli news source Yediot Ahronoth recently reported that the White House told the Iranian government they would not assist in an Israeli strike if American interests were let be in the Persian Gulf yet the Obama administration has denied the allegation. The U.S. military literally has the country surrounded with bases; as if already prepared for a full blown assault. A campaign in Iran will be added to the lengthy list of Middle East excursions this decade that include Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and Libya. The drums for war are indeed being pounded upon not by the general public but by well-connected interest groups looking to profit from bloodshed.The United States isn’t the only country whose leaders are opposed to Iran’s government possessing nuclear arms. The European Union’s embargo of Iran’s oil exporters came into effect on July 1st in an effort to curb the nuclear program. In fact, many Western nations including Canada and Japan have colluded to ban their citizens from doing business in Iran. Following the U.S.’s lead, it has been decided by the power players in the international community that Iran is not allowed to have nuclear arms.The idea that the U.S. government should be the sole decider of what governments are allowed to own what weapons is demonstrative of the hegemonic desires of the ruling establishment. It is automatically assumed that because the government of Iran refuses to bow down to the American empire, it should be stripped of its sovereignty. There is no consideration of the question at the heart of the matter: should people have the right to own nuclear weapons in a free society?It is certainly not outside the bounds of moral considerations to agree that people should have the right to defend themselves from harm’s way or if they feel genuinely threatened. This includes the right to own small arms for defensive purposes. Denying someone the right to own arms is denying them the right to protect their own life. In the context of violent behavior, the act of simply owning a firearm or weapon in no way constitutes a threat towards another. In a society where property rights are respected and upheld, gun control is a coercive intrusion into peaceful living.But does the notion that man has a natural right to own the means to protect his life apply to nuclear weapons?At first glance it may appear so since the mere possessing of a nuclear bomb does not constitute a threat toward anyone. There is a clear difference between owning a gun and a thermonuclear device however. As Murray Rothbard explains:…while the bow and arrow and even the rifle can be pinpointed, if the will be there, against actual criminals, modern nuclear weapons cannot. Here is a crucial difference in kind. Of course, the bow and arrow could be used for aggressive purposes, but it could also be pinpointed to use only against aggressors. Nuclear weapons, even ‘conventional’ aerial bombs, cannot be. These weapons are ipso facto engines of indiscriminate mass destruction.Nuclear weapons are bound to kill innocents just because the radius of damage is so encompassing. Since they can’t be pinpointed, nuclear weaponry can’t be used purely for defensive purposes on Earth. The only plausible scenario for the justified stockpiling of a nuclear bomb is if there exists a threat beyond Earth. Economist Walter Block calls this the proportionality thesis. Because the universe is conceivably wide enough where the setting off of a nuclear device may not harm an innocent person, ownership of an atom bomb can be permissible.Nuclear weaponry has only one function; the annihilation of vast amounts of people and property. There is no other use. In a free society on Earth (which is thus far the only planet known to have the resources to sustain rational beings like humans) there would be no need for anyone to own nuclear arms. For the state that operates off of the power-lusting of its controllers, the incentives change. Through educational indoctrination and media propaganda the nation-state becomes synonymous with its inhabitants. Americans, Canadians, Brits, etc., are affiliated with their government even when certain atrocities are committed solely by individuals of authority. This mistaken identify provides the perfect cover for the various political classes to scheme for further power grabs. Wars between states are often fought not for the defense of the citizenry but for other motives outside of protecting life. They are neither an economic stimulant nor a dignified crusade; they are destructive and horrifying. War is really mass murder financed through violent means; both of which are unlawful under natural law. Ultimately it is the various minions of the state seeking national glory and resources located in the jurisdiction of another nation-state who conduct war.For the U.S. government to even begin to lecture Iran’s on whether or not it should have the right to develop a nuclear weapon ignores the very fact that it remains the one and only government on the planet to ever used the atom bomb to exterminate millions. American school children are often told that the use of the nuke was necessary to save the troops who were going to invade Japan during World War II even though such an explanation is dubious. As John V. Denson points out, President Truman kept to a policy of no-surrender even while the Japanese government was willing to admit defeat as long as the emperor could remain in power. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were carried out as a demonstration of force to the Russians. Many of his advisers, including General Eisenhower, had pressured him to not go ahead with the nuking but Truman would have none of it. Establishing the United States government as a supreme world power was more important than the lives of innocent women and children.It should also be noted that while it is widely believed that Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, threatened to wipe the nation of Israel “off the map,” this was a mistranslation. On October 25, 2005, Ahmadinejad reportedly gave a speech titled “The World Without Zionism” in which he supposedly uttered the infamous remark. But as Arash Norouzi, co-founder of the Mossadegh Project, explains, the words “Israel,” “map,” and “wipe out” were never actually uttered.So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in Farsi:“Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.”That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word “regime.” pronounced just like the English word with an extra “eh” sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase ”rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods” (regime occupying Jerusalem).So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want “wiped from the map”? The answer is: nothing.None of this is to say that Iran’s government is filled with respectable men trying to do what is best for Iranians. It has its own history of brutal murders and political suppression. This despicable behavior is not an excuse to distort facts however. As history has shown, campaigns of misinformation are often orchestrated to make way for war. And unfortunately for Americans and Iranians alike, war may very well be on the horizon.The heightening tension between the United States government and Iran’s is based off of the fallacious notion that nuclear weapons have a legitimate purpose outside of killing enormous amounts of people. Yet they have no other real purpose in the end. Governments possess nuclear weaponry because there is little recourse for state-sanctioned murder. The millions of innocent lives that stand to be vanquished off the face of the Earth have little meaning to the power-tripping political elite. So while the Iranian government’s pursuance of nuclear weapons should be condemned, the United States government, the Israeli government, and others capable of waging nuclear war are in no place to criticize.http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-does-iranian-government-have-right-nuclear-bomb
Las armas de microondas siguen sin funcionar:http://www.cienciakanija.com/2012/09/17/armas-de-microondas-energia-malgastada/
Esta noticia me hace recordar la conferencia de un "barbudo" en USA, que aludía a que una vez levantado todo el pueblo islámico (revoluciones de colores) resurjería Israel con una arma oculta consiguiendo como fin último el gran imperio sionista desde las orillas del Nilo hasta las del Tigris/Eufrates (ver bandera israelí).Creo recordar que fue una conferencia dada sobre el año 2004.Si alguien la tiene localizada no estaría de más pegarla en algún hilo.http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/view/53283-israel-podria-devolver-iran-edad-piedra-mediante-radiacion-electromagneticaIsrael podría “devolver a Irán a la Edad de Piedra” mediante la radiación electromagnética El ataque sería capaz de cubrir un país entero, causando un completo caos civil y militar en el área alcanzadaEl Estado de Israel podría recurrir al sofisticado ataque de pulso electromagnético (PEM) contra Irán y paralizar de esta manera todos los aparatos electrónicos, “devolviendo al país a la Edad de Piedra”. El informe, publicado este domingo en el diario británico ‘The Sunday Times’, apunta que la Defensa de Israel tiene reservada esta “sorpresa” para la República Islámica, que podría ser aplicada por el Estado hebreo para detener el polémico programa nuclear iraní. Una explosión del PEM libera un alto nivel de radiación en la atmósfera, que entrando en reacción con el campo magnético de la Tierra, es capaz de “freír” a cualquier equipo electrónico, a menos que esté bien protegido. La radiación gamma es altamente penetrante e interactúa con la materia irradiando e ionizándolo todo, incluido el propio aire circundante. Se consume enseguida y crea un campo electromagnético de kilómetros de diámetro. Reto: paralizar a todo el país El ataque del PEM de gran altitud, sostiene el diario, sería capaz de cubrir un país entero, causando un completo caos civil y militar en el área alcanzada debido a la privación de los servicios esenciales, tales como electricidad, agua potable, distribución alimentaria y comunicaciones durante un período indefinido. También deshabilitaría todos los radares, sistemas de armas y lanzamiento, así como otros equipos militares que se encuentren en la superficie. No obstante, según destaca el medio, los seres vivos y los objetos no eléctricos serían inmunes al ataque. Además, debido a que las instalaciones nucleares iraníes, como se sospecha, se encuentran a una gran profundidad bajo tierra, el PEM no podría desactivarlas por completo. EE.UU. en alerta El informe revela que el posible uso del PEM ha sido planteado en varias ocasiones por los políticos de Israel, que creen que si el arma es tan potente debería ponerse en marcha contra las instalaciones nucleares de Irán, aunque su uso genera debate interno. El medio británico cita las palabras de Bill Gertz, especialista veterano de la defensa estadounidense, quien informa de "la creciente preocupación” por parte la inteligencia norteamericana, que sabe que Israel “llevará a cabo una explosión nuclear de gran altitud, destinada a perturbar toda la red electrónica del país" persa. EE.UU., varios países occidentales y, sobre todo, Israel, dudan del carácter pacífico del programa nuclear iraní, al considerar que la República Islámica está desarrollando una bomba atómica, hecho que Teherán nunca ha reconocido. No obstante, bajo este pretexto el Estado hebreo ya había amenazado en reiteradas ocasiones con atacar las instalaciones nucleares de Irán en busca de poner fin a su programa. El país norteamericano, por su parte, sigue optando por intentar resolver el problema iraní mediante duras sanciones económicas.
Este "arma oculta" es más vieja que el catarro. Es una bomba arcoiris (también conocida como pulso electromagnético o EMP) y es bastante "low-tech" para los tiempos que corren, pero muy eficaz contra un enemigo muy tecnificado y en especial para la población civil. Consiste en detonar una bomba nuclear pequeñita en cierta parte de la atmósfera de tal forma que por efecto de la radiación electromagnética todos los aparatos e instalaciones eléctricas del país se funden por las altas corrientes inducidas. Es un arma no letal pero que pone al enemigo a tus pies y le envía directamente al S. XIX, sólo que sin la tecnología del S.XIX, con lo que los disturbios, el hambre, el caos (no habría ni transportes ni comunicaciones o l menos una gran parte se verían afectados) y demás no tardarían en surgir. En la wikipedia hay artículo y todo.De hecho yo creo que Israel teme más a un ataque de este tipo que a otra cosa (porque jodes mucho más con un arma de una potencia muchísimo menor y además no tienes que matar directamente a nadie). Dependen mucho de la tecnología en general y probablemente no tengan sus sistemas y vehículos preparados para algo así (o al menos una buena proporción).En mi opinión hoy día los países más industrializados no dejan que otros países se armen con armas nucleares por este tipo de uso, mucho más devastador que las detonaciones directas en un area infinitamente mayor y con unas necesidades tecnológicas mucho más bajas. Israel debe hacerse caquita si Irán consigue una cosa así, porque les lanzan uno de esos e Israel es historia (sobrevendría un ataque de todas los países vecinos con una población civil completamente sumida en el caos).EDIT: Tras leer el artículo en inglés de la Wiki, me acabo de enterar de que países como Rusia y China dicen tener desarrollada tecnología "super-EMP" que con armas nucleares de menor potencia que las ensayadas por los yankees, consiguen unos pulsos electromagnéticos mucho más potentes que según dicen son capaces incluso de cargarse equipos con protección específica contra ellos (en los primeros experimentos las protecciones no sirvieron en muchos aparatos de medición que se fundieron igualmente). Aparentemente lo consiguen detonando las bombas de una forma tal que el pulso se genera mucho más rápido de lo normal.Hagan las cuentas sobre quién está aliado con quien, y quien tiene acceso a esta información, como por ejemplo Irán.
No creo que nadie se atreva a jugar con un PEM entre otras cosas porque debe ser difícil, imagino, acotar el volumen total de su acción, se pueden averiar satélites y sobre todo traspasar fronteras (las de Irán son delicadas), y de entrada imagino que se asesina a todos los viajeros de aeronaves civiles en vuelo, que son unas cuantas en cualquier momento del día en el área que pueda abarcar un pulso de esos.Al ser además una detonación nuclear es casi abrir la puerta a una respuesta nuclear de verdad, o al uso de armas biológicas de nueva generación cuyas especificaciones ni conocemos, etc.