kenpo tiger said:
. . .
MichaelEdward,
(You notice I'm being particularly careful in how I address you. You New Englanders are a testy lot.)
I'd like to think that it's that difficult for third world countries to obtain the final piece - i.e., fissionable material - but, realistically, I must respectfully disagree with you. There are too many wealthy people manipulating too many poor countries to believe that the funds aren't available should the "right" situation present itself. Poor countries are only too willing to trade some of their natural assets for liquid assets and goods (e.g., gold mines or diamonds in South Africa for weapons).
And, what about the 'sleeping giants'? I was reading an article about the upcoming election in Egypt. They've remained fairly quiet within the context of all the happenings in the Middle East (ours and others). I can't help but think that some of those 'quiet' countries could be functioning as clearing houses for a whole passel of weapons - nuclear and otherwise - because of their low profile right now. KT
Well ... I try not to be too testy ... my first name is michael, my middle name is edward, my last name is atkinson .... michaeledward is the name I used to use when I was a guitar player ... it was never quite as catchy as 'Sting' ... but we try.
Concerning Fissionable Material ... it seems to me we have 3 choices.
1 - We can work on monitoring and controlling these materials.
2 - We can confiscate the materials, where ever they are (perhaps requiring military action)
3 - We can keep doing what we are doing, and hope for the best.
Are there other options? I don't know. Of the three I list, I believe that #1 is the best choice. And it is the best choice for those countries that don't have nuclear capabilities as well. South America is Nuclear Weapon Free
by choice. But, a nuclear weapon can detonate in South America as easily as anyhwere else; thus it is in Brazil's interest to monitor fissile materials.
Concerning Egypt ... well, dont' we send alot of cash their way each year? Isn't that the price we paid for Egyptian - Israeli peace? Anyhow, it certainly is in the interest of the Egyptian government to ensure the safety and security of any fissile materials, where-ever it is.
It is not a perfect solution. There will always be the possibility of danger. So, how do we make the most reasonable steps toward securing our safety? The current relationship the United States has with Pakistan is an interesting example. There are some bad people in Pakistan. In their own self interest, they have become a player in fighting al Qaeda. We need to nurture that behavior, and expand upon it. It sure is strange to do this dance with the devil, but if we keep ignoring the country, they will work harder to get our attention (North Korea anyone).
We'll see. I am interested in what other ways people think might be effective in securing the worlds supply of 'highly enriched uranium' and 'plutonium'. Thoughts?
Mike
