When Pigs Fly

After every deep-serious meeting with Russian and/or Chinese leaders, Secretary of State Condi Rice emerges to tell her media sycophants that the Russians and/or Chinese basically agree with our position on Iran’s nuclear programs.

Condi’s position is that Iran’s nuclear programs – widely expected to be certified in March by Mohamed ElBaradei, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, to be fully Safeguarded and completely peaceful in nature – are merely a cover for a nuclear weapons program ElBaradei can’t find. Hence, she hopes you’ll believe that the Russians and Chinese share her beliefs.

You've all heard that expression, "Yeah right, when pigs fly"?

Well, the belief the Russians and Chinese “share” with Condi-baby about Iranian nuclear programs is the rough equivalent of a belief that – for a variety of reasons – pigs probably ought to be discouraged from trying to fly.

By "diplomatic means," of course, if at all possible.

And by March, at the very latest.

Of course, the Russians and Chinese don’t share Condi’s belief that pigs are secretly trying to fly. In fact, they’ve seen no evidence whatsoever that pigs even want to fly.

And they can’t believe that Condi insists on referring the "grave threat" of pigs wanting to fly to the UN Security Council for "possible" punitive action.

What punitive actions?

Economic sanctions, at first, under Article 41 of the UN Charter. But if that doesn’t discourage pigs from wanting to fly, the use of force under Article 42.

According to Condi the Iranians are lying when they insist they not only don’t have a nuclear weapons program, but don’t need or even want to have nukes.

Now, General Musharraf, dictator of Iran’s nuke-armed Islamic neighbor, Pakistan, publicly declares that if Iran is threatened by some other nuke-armed state – such as Israel, for example – he believes that Iran has the right to develop nukes.

That would, of course, mean that Iran would have to withdraw from the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons, to which Iran is a signatory, but to which neither nuke-armed Pakistan or nuke-armed Israel has ever been.

In any event, Musharraf has pledged to assist Iran should it be attacked by nuke-armed states, such as the US and/or Israel.

You might have wondered whether Musharraf really means that. After all, Pakistan – along with Israel – is our "Non-NATO ally."

But Pakistan defied Bush by signing on last year to be a partner in the construction and operation of a multi-billion dollar Iran-Pakistan-India natural gas pipeline.

Then, last week, the CIA killed a dozen or so Pakistani men, women and children with missiles launched in Pakistani airspace by US Predator un-manned aircraft.

Perhaps as a result of intense spontaneous Pakistani outrage, Musharraf announced that the CIA hadn’t asked his permission to do it and that they’d better not do such a thing ever again.

What was Bush’s response to those warnings by Pakistan?

How?

Well, how about moving the Zionist state to America or Europe?

"Israel's our ally. We're committed to the safety of Israel, and it's a commitment we will keep.

Secondly, I'm concerned about a nontransparent society's desire to develop a nuclear weapon."

Apparently he’s referring to Iran here, not Pakistan or Israel, and shares Condi’s belief that pigs want to fly.

"The world cannot be put in a position where we can be blackmailed by a nuclear weapon. I believe it is very important for the Iranian government to hear loud and clear from not only the United States, but also from other nations around the world."

Fair enough. But the Iranian government apparently already agrees that is "very important" for the US to honor the commitment made on our behalf by President Clinton at the 6^th NPT Review Conference to "an unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon states to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals."

Will Bush honor that commitment?

When pigs fly.