You've got them, so I want them too

Returned from the weekend, and I’m pleased to report that I’ve had plenty of sleep and feel suitably refreshed. The weekend can best be described as cake weekend! MTL was celebrating his 20th birthday, 5 days prematurely, and had 3 cakes to mark the occasion. A lavish chocolate cake he bought, a carrot cake made by Jughead and another coffee-walnut cake! Then yesterday, my wife decided to join in on the fun by baking a cake of her own for her father’s birthday. I’m surely pilling on the weight now!

What a disappointing result for England, but totally unsurprising. Since the World Cup, I’ve become a bit impartial to the national football team. They’ve always talked a good game, but time and time again failed to deliver when it counts and the result on Saturday was no exception. The change in manager is still producing similar events. Players are still being used despite being out of form (Wayne Rooney, Michael Carrick, Frank Lampard) and other players being used out of position (Steven Gerrard). Nothing seems to change and my support for the team continues to fade!

Anyway, enough about the football. I don't know about you, but personally, whenever I see a new bit of kit, new electrical equipment, new book or whatever, in a shop or at a friends, I like to get one myself, or at least borrow it to check it out. I've just upgraded my phone to the new Orange SPV M3100 and it is a fantastic piece of kit. I upgraded after seeing it on the web and reading reviews, it was new and I wanted it. Other people we're raving about it and so I wanted to get one myself. It's seems a reasonable idea, wanting what others have, as long as you can afford to.

News reports this morning stating that North Korea had carried out nuclear tests was met with international condemnation. Now, if you exaggerate my policy of wanting what others have, North Korea is simply exerting its right to have something that others already own. The countries leading the complaints all possess nuclear weapons and yet are calling for severe sanctions to be imposed on N. Korea simply for having something they already possess.

Now before I get carried away, I'd like to state that N. Korea possessing nuclear weapons is an extremely bad idea. Such a secretive nation, where it is impossible to visit (why would you want to?) or leave, I'm sure that having the power to deploy nuclear weapons can only be extremely dangerous. Who knows what they would do with it. But the countries kicking up a fuss have only themselves to blame.

What right do they have to try and force other countries to not develop weapons? How can they on the one hand constantly develop the quality of the own weapons of mass destruction and then condemn others for trying to do the same. Instead their actions serve to encourage these volatile nations to try and develop ways to protect themselves.

The so-called Non Nuclear Proliferation Treaty is a joke. Never have there been any reports of the UK, or the US, or India or Pakistan publicly showing attempts to restrict their nuclear weapons and infact work towards destroying them. Instead countries like Israel are supplied with a host of nuclear weapons which only serves to pile more tension in the Middle East. Infact the current situation in Iraq is an advertisement of the advantages of developing and possessing nuclear weapons.

The whole basis of the war on Iraq in the UK was the whole WMD issue. Tony Blair tried to convince the government and the public that Saddam Hussein possessed WMD's and was keen to develop nuclear weapons and something had to be done about it. Having already defied UN security resolutions, there was no alternative but to engage in military procedures on the country in an attempt to curb Saddam and destroy the WMD’s.

Three years on from the initial war and Iraq is an absolute disaster. I was fortunate enough to visit Iraq 8 months before the war and visited the holy cities of Najaf, Kaizymain and Kerbala. Now we repeatedly hear of suicide attacks and bomb explosions in all these places and others, and thousands of muslims continue to die. It is an absolute disgrace. These are some of the holiest cities for Shia Muslims and they are being destroyed. It is extremely upsetting to see the state of these cities. All because of the US and UK attempts to convince the world that Saddam was a threat and needed to be dealt with.

If Saddam really did possess these WMD’s and even nuclear weapons, what was the chance that war would've taken place? Close to zero I suspect. This knowledge can only encourage countries like N. Korea, Syria and Iran to develop nuclear weapons, because once they come in possession of these weapons, no-one will dare to attack them. No-one will attack a nuclear power because of the potential consequences of suffering a nuclear attack upon themselves.

America, the only nation to actually detonate a nuclear weapon as an act of war in the history of the world, continues to exert pressure on the UN, on Iran and N.Korea to try and restrict their efforts, but to no avail. Today we learnt that N.Korea has carried out tests, tomorrow we may learn that Iran is on its way to developing nuclear weapons as well.

I've just never understood how the UK and America can hope to condemn such actions whilst they continue to own the very same weapons. Why should any nation listen to them? Until the nuclear powers are seen to be doing something about their own stock, no other country will listen. I must stress that I agree it is extremely dangerous for countries like N.Korea to possess nuclear weapons, but who can blame them.

Iran is another country seen as potentially developing nuclear weapons and efforts are continuing to try and curb these attempts. If the Iraq war hadn't happened, then I've no doubt that Iran would've been the target for military attention. As it stands, such has been the absolute failure of Bush's war in Iraq; he'll have great difficulty trying to justify an attack on Iran, even though it is probably what he wants the most.

Iran is the main Shia nation of the world. It has a majority Shia population and is governed by Shia rulers. The president, Ahmadinejad, is continually reported to have stated that he wants to "wipe Israel off the map," which is a convenient play with words, because in fact what he did say was "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the pages of time." The original quote has been twisted and keeps cropping up whenever Iran's nuclear plans are brought up. However, what people must understand is that the President is not in charge, he will not one day be able to launch a nuclear warhead on Israel. That power (if it ever exists) belongs to the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khameni, and there is no chance that a Shia muslim scholar will ever justify the death of thousands of Israeli and Palestinians for generations to come. In Islam it is simply not allowed. Iran will never launch a nuclear missile as an act of aggregation on another nation.

As long as these countries continue to exert pressure on these nations and call for sanctions, whilst at the same time continue to develop their own stock, nothing will happen. Countries will continue to defy any sanctions and do their very best to continue with nuclear development plans. The nuclear powers need to curb their own production and cut down on the amount of missiles/bombs/warheads they possess and then other countries will have no choice but to follow their example and curb their own ideas. If not, then it will be fully justified for severe sanctions to be imposed with the chance of military actions. If the nuclear powers continue down the same path, then who knows what may happen in the not so distant future?

Take care all,
Thoughts just flow, when do they have to make sense?