Second, by detailing how the Pakistani government was involved in nuclear transfers to Iran, Khan raises new questions about Beijing’s role. Why? The Pakistani nuclear weapons program is essentially an extension of the Chinese one. China, beginning around 1974, transferred bomb technology to Pakistan. Beijing’s assistance was crucial, extensive, and continuous. As Gary Milhollin of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control has noted, “If you subtract China’s help from Pakistan’s nuclear program, there is no nuclear program.” Moreover, Beijing has remained involved in Islamabad’s nuclear efforts, long after the events Khan so meticulously describes in Sunday’s statements.

FOXNews.com – Iran Tried to Buy the Pakistani Bomb. What Was China’s Role?

Recent developments in Iran confirm that China is providing Tehran with critical defense technologies and weapons systems, including some that violate stated Chinese policies aimed at preventing nuclear proliferation.

Iran’s link to China includes nukes, missiles – Washington Times

Iran attempted to buy a nuclear bomb from Pakistan as early as 1987, a leading Middle East analyst has told Haaretz.

Documents obtained by Simon Henderson, a research fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a former journalist, offer crucial evidence that Iran’s nuclear program is not wholly for civilian purposes as it claims – but aimed at developing an atomic bomb.

Iran tried to buy nuclear bomb from Pakistan as early as 1987 – Haaretz – Israel News

China has emerged as Iran’s top economic partner, investing heavily in the energy sector and filling the gaps left by Western firms forced out by international sanctions.

In 2009, China became Iran’s premier trade partner, with bilateral trade worth 21.2 billion dollars against 14.4 billion dollars three years earlier.

China takes over from West as Iran’s main economic partner – Yahoo! News

Iran wins in the simulation. Iran will win in the real world too. I guess that’s not what you wanted to read.

The [simulation game] result: Iran won.

Gary Sick, the Iran team leader and former Carter-era National Security Council member, was surprised. “We started out thinking we were playing a weak hand, but by the end, everyone was negotiating for us,” he told The Washington Post. But results like this should surprise no one. The strategic premises of the exercise were: Iran wants to continue its nuclear program; Israel wants to stop Iran’s nuclear program; and the United States wants to avoid conflict. These assumptions closely mirror reality and point to why the United States is increasingly unable to influence events. Conflict avoidance is not a strategy; it is institutionalized weakness.

EDITORIAL: Iran triumphs over America – Washington Times

This is typical Leftist thinking. Troublemaker countries like Iran are truly victims. Who is the victimizer? Countries that are successful and powerful like America and Israel.

This is a sick and dangerous way of thinking that literally says bad is good and good is bad. This thinking is just as dangerous as Marxism/Communism.

His conclusion is that Iran is developing nuclear weapons out of a rational fear for its national safety because of the systematically threatening posture of the United States and Israel.

The Harvard Law Record – Noam Chomsky: Iran pursuing nuclear weapons out of fear

As the United States steps up its campaign to impose economic sanctions on Iran, fears are growing in Washington and in the Middle East that Iran will try to trigger a new war in the region in order to shift attention from its nuclear activities, throw the U.S. and its allies off balance, and put Israel on the defensive.

Few people, if any, envision Iran launching a direct attack. Rather, the concern is that Tehran will manage to stir up trouble in Israel, the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, or even Syria, in order to spark a new confrontation between Israel and one of its Iran-allied neighbors.

WPR Article | World Citizen: Fears that Iran Wants to Trigger Mideast War

It’s not that Brazil is wrong about Iran. It’s that something else is going on that we don’t know about. For example, could Iran have something that Brazil badly wants? Nuclear technology perhaps?

Even before visiting Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could appeal for Brazil to support sanctions against Iran for breaking the rules of nuclear-weapons proliferation, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva offered this airy dismissal: “It is not prudent to push Iran against a wall.”

What wall?

Brazil wrong about Iran – Sacramento Living – Sacramento Food and Wine, Home, Health | Sacramento Bee