I’ve got a bad feeling about this
Okay, I want to hear the White House response to this, but it looks like twice in twenty-four hours I’ll be agreeing with a Democratic congresscritter. This time it’s Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, no less, who is advancing the radical proposal that maybe George Bush shouldn’t be committing your tax dollars to developing a nuclear program for Saudi Arabia:
The Bush administration argues that Saudi Arabia can not be compared to Iran, because Riyadh said it won’t develop uranium enrichment or spent-fuel reprocessing, the two most dangerous nuclear technologies. At a recent hearing before my Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman shrugged off concerns about potential Saudi misuse of nuclear assistance for a weapons program, saying simply: “I presume that the president has a good deal of confidence in the King and in the leadership of Saudi Arabia.”
Well, of course Ed Markey is wrong because, umm…because…err…the Saudis can’t afford it?
No, that can’t be it. Tell me why he’s wrong?
Because that sounds to me like another permutation of the faith-based non-proliferation policy.
BACKGROUND: Hey, this looks like a trend. From January:
Sarkozy, who has already signed civilian nuclear deals with Arab oil producers Algeria and Libya, has made no secret of his view that Muslim and Arab states have a right to atomic power.
Tuesday’s agreements set a framework for future cooperation on nuclear energy and allow France to establish a military base with an official capacity of 400-500 people in the UAE, which lies across a short stretch of Gulf waters from Iran, a document distributed by Sarkozy’s office said.
France’s Total confirmed on Monday it would develop two third-generation nuclear reactors in the UAE with Suez as its main partner and state-owned nuclear reactor maker Areva.
One thought to explain this trend: Professor Rice is something of a Waltzian neo-realist with a strong belief in power-balancing, one confirmed by her experience as a Russia specialist during the Cold War. Maybe the allies are hoping to guide the Arab states’ nuclear programs into a state like that of Japan–which I’ve heard described (facetiously) as “45 minutes from having a nuclear capability”. That way they can deter and contain an aggressive Iran from messing with them or with the flow of oil.
It’ll be like the Reagan days when we played off Iraq and Iran against each other. Except this time there’s fission involved. After all, when it comes to nuclear weapons, Waltz says that “More may be better“. And if we and our allies are involved in the construction of these programs, we’ll be able to keep an eye on them and know where to look if something odd is going on.
That assumes (as Markey notes) that we trust Saudi Arabia, as well as the Emirates, Algeria, and Libya (!!!!) to manage a nuclear program safely and responsibly, and not, say, leak any of the reactor waste products to a terrorist for packing up a dirty bomb. Or to start enriching uranium, like Iran is doing. Because we’re, uh, kinda having trouble stopping them.
All of which sounds kind of complicated. Me, I’ve got a better idea.
Exit question: Didn’t we just take the nuclear car keys away from Libya a few years ago?
____________________
{Post by See-Dubya.}
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- PoliGazette » Giving Nuclear Weapons to Saudi Arabia
- KICKIN' AND SCREAMIN'...........
- Media Mythbusters Blog » Blog Archive » Media Bias Roundup - 06/10/08
- Michelle Malkin » An interesting angle on the Iran problem: induce high gasoline prices through a worldwide embargo
- Michelle Malkin » Worried about our normalizing diplomatic relations with Libya? Here’s something worse.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Condi Rice, George W. Bush, Homeland Security, Saudi Arabia
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
American Thinker
» Sarah Palin and the low ebb of the cultural leftRedstate
» Morning Briefing for November 24, 2009Doug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomBig Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump ScandalVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Nice Deb
» O
First, I don’t think we have any Arab “allies” in the Middle East. Just convenient friends. Second, I wouldn’t trust any one of them, out of sight. “Trust but verify”. The Saudis can afford their own program. Our taxpayer money shouldn’t be used for anything there.
Okay, I want to hear the White House response to this, but it looks like twice in twenty-four hours I’ll be agreeing with a Democratic congresscritter.
No offense, see-dubya, but Mr. Markey is a duly elected representative of the people of the state of Massachusetts.
I think we can do better than “critter”. Congressman, for example, would work much better.
I may disagree with the Democrats as much as the next guy here, and generally I do – although I certainly agree with your stance here, see-dubya – but a certain level of decorum should prevail when discussing the title of a member of congress.
But they are critters. Most politicians are rats and the rest are little meek mice. Elected they may be but, their general makes the idea of treating them with respect in any way a little distasteful.
In the UK we made our distaste official by calling all our elected representatives “Members”. Think about it for a moment.
“It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress”.
Mark Twain
I agree with graysonret. If any country can afford anything they want without MY MONEY, it’s Saudi. This idea that Saudi is an ally is silly. Saudi is composed of a royal family numbering in the thousands, many of which hate the west and especially us and Israel.
What the hell is going on here? Our tax dollars developing nuclear for Saudi Arabia? Damn right it should be stopped!
We’re paying record prices for energy, yet sending our tax dollars to help Islamic nations awash in oil to develop nuclear power?
Maybe some of what the libtards have been saying about Boosh is right. This is madness. Where’s our nuclear energy?
Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
Mark Twain
What the heck?! This is just a flat out stupid move on the part of our country. IMHO.
What’s next, a corn to ethanol pilot project for the An-Nafud?
The Administration is not working to bring armed force to bear against Iran to stop theri nuclear ambitions. It is pressuring Israel to NOT attack Iran.
“Give a mouse a cookie, and they’ll ask for a glass of milk.”
I pretty much agree that there is no reason for U.S. tax dollars to pay for nuclear power plants in these countries. The only thing I’d like to point out is that having a nuclear reactor is a far cry from having a nuclear weapon. The enrichment process, including the recycling process of spent fuel rods (for all intents and purposes, the same thing,) is what really matters.
The only rational argument of which I can think for the President is that if we support the Saudis with nuclear energy, then perhaps they’ll give us oil at a cheaper price, and support us when Iran gets a nuclear weapon. If we find that we can trust the Saudis with one talent (a nuclear reactor), then perhaps we can use them to counterbalance Iran and give them ten talents (a nuclear weapon or two.) Sure, it’s a stretch, but not beyond the realm of possibility.
That’s true, you can’t reasonably compare Iran and Saudi Arabia. There’s a world of difference between them.
Like, for instance, Iran didn’t produce the 9/11 attackers.
The last thing we need to do is spend US tax dollars to support nuclear power for a country sitting on a sea of oil. Especially with enough of our dollars going over there to fill the coffers thanks to the unwarranted rise in oil prices. I trust the house of Saud with nuclear weapons about has far as I can throw them and from what I remember when I was in Riyadh back in the 80s most of these guys are so well fed I would have trouble picking them up.
Saudis need cheap energy? No way – this is carrying coals to Newcastle.
Why nuclear power? Are the Saudis going green? Are they concerned about climate change? How would they know? “Hey, Ahmed, it’s going to be 125 degrees today instead of 120. Wear a hat.”
This is surreal.
Well, that settles it then. Imagine our surprise when SA drops a nuke on Israel. Just like Jimmy said about Russia, I cant believe they lied to us.
How flippin stupid are we going to continue to get?
Paying for nuclear power in Saudi Arabia is COMPLETELY INSANE!!!!
By the way, it’s “Secretary of State” Rice, not Professor Rice. I didn’t read any link in your
articlepost about her views or involvement in the situation.What’s a bit of enriched uranium between friends? I mean, seriously, what could go wrong? It’s not as if a Saudi has ever attacked the United States, or led a group of terrorists, right?
One of the key reasons that BDS has flourished is because, like all crazy-talk, there’s a shred of reality in it. For whatever reason, the Bushes are WAY to close to the Saudis. You don’t need to be a member of Code Pink to see that.
It’s hard to believe that we are about to have a WORSE president than we have now…
Though its more proper to call her by her higher title, she is in fact a Professor…just a nitpick, i know
Another wonderful idea ! There are cells in Saudi Arabia that are just spoiling for a big fight with the ruling family, they want a total takeover. And wouldn’t NUKES be a nice added benefit ? Dumb move folks, real dumb……………..
Sounds perfectly safe.
The house of Saud is definately not our friend. We are nothing more than dhimis to them. We are subdued because we need their oil. The only reason I can think of why we should be involved with their nuclear program is so that we can keep an eye on it and try to control it. It is a dangerous game though as all it takes is one shipment of enriched uranium to be ‘lost’ and they are on their way to a bomb. A far safer strategy would be to simply say ‘you can’t have nuclear power until all of you oil is gone’. Hey, maybe then they’d start pumping a little more.
Just to level-set:
The level of enrichment used to fuel a commercial reactor isn’t enough for a fission bomb. I’m not too worried about anyone intercepting a shipment and converting it into a bomb.
OTOH, it makes a wonderful payload for a dirty bomb.
Even better, let the reactor run for awhile and use the “spent” rods and sister/daughter elements. It’s amazing what a good nuclear chemist can do with a working reactor in terms of making really nasty stuff.
This isn’t a state secret. There are Ph.D’s all over China, India, Pakistan, Russia, etc. who can (and have) gotten their degrees in this subject.
But if fission is really what worries you, there’s no denying that fuel rods are “halfway there” in terms of enrichment. If you use them as a starting point, you’re already well on your way to having weapons grade stuff.
So, you see, there is nothing but upside in the USA giving nuclear technology and fuel to the Saudi’s. Brilliant.
Did Dubya learn this at Yale, or was it Harvard?
Man, Israel must really be feeling it, now. They must be digging shelters like you wouldn’t believe, because we (the West, including our Fearless Leaders here in the USA) are backing them into a corner.
We like to think about all of the bad things that can happen if the USA is attacked, and that’s a valid point, but…
What if a large percentage of the Mid East’s oil production capacity is destroyed or rendered unusable in a nuclear exchange between Israel and their neighbors? Even if the interruption were only for a year or two, the economic effects would be enormous.
There are *excellent* reasons for us to be pushing hard for technologies that get us off of foreign (and even domestic) oil. The sooner we don’t need our “friends” in the MidEast, the better…
Will the insanity from the District of Criminals ever cease?
Saudi Arabia *with all their oil billions* receiving subsidies from We the People to develop nuclear power!
My Yankee common-sense says if the Saudis want nuclear power they can go on the market and get it on their own.
Other posters may have a point about if we do it this way we might be able to supervise them a little better.
To those I say whoever supplies them with nuclear fuel does so on the basis they will manage the spent fuel elements and take them out of S.A. when they’ve cooled down enough to do so safely and that S.A. will agree not to engage in enrichment or reprocessing.
Note during the Soviet era the former USSR supplied its satellites nuclear fuel on an ‘exchange’ basis, that is they had to return the spent fuel in order to get fresh fuel.
I was just thinking…
This makes about as much sense ( probably less) than the U.S. paying for Mexico’s border fence (on their Southern border.)
This will just hasten the providing nuclear materials if not a bomb to the Sunni based AlQueda – fits with the Obama plan for sure, seems odd that Bush would push it.
What a fabulous idea to give the Saudis a nuclear reactor! If you consider what they did with box-cutters, just imagine what they can do with uranium!
I can’t wait for the day President Obama goes to Burayda, Saudi Arabia to dedicate the opening of the Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab “Death to America” Nuclear Reactor. Maybe we can hand the Wahhabis maps of the most vulnerable places to strike in America.
Tantor, and you can thank Prez Bush for this fantastic idea..since he’s into holding the sheiks hands and playing smoochy woochy them..its not odd that he would push this since he is a traitor to this country.
Good Lord….
Let me see if I’ve got this right.
While not doing anything to promote domestic energy production we are using tax dollars to help Saudi Arabia build nuclear power plants?
I’m too flabbergasted by this idiocy to frame a cogent comment right now.
Then why the F#$% have we been spending money to fight the War on terror for ?
If this plan goes through we might as well apologize to Libya, remnants of Saddam’s regime, and the other Axis of Evil countries..and just pull out of Iraq!
Such a plan spits in the face of the sacrifices of our troops dead or alive…
My head is shaking big time.
Why should this be a surprise? Bush has never tried to represent our country, but has consistently represented the New World Order. He has committed open treason and the American people seem to love it as they consistently elect politicians that refuse to represent “We the People.” The United States of America, the grandest country in known history, may you RIP.
anyone have a dollar figure??? i can’t find it anywhere….
ahhh in the land of the free i can’t even mention what i’m thinking of.
Uh, actually, those huge ominous structures aren’t nuclear reactors; they’re just water cooling towers. Found as much at coal-fired plants too.
But they look scary enough for the MSM not to correct that assumption for their anti-nuke agenda…
James Greenidge
Queens, NY