February 3, 200521 yr http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor.../iran_nuclear_3 TEHRAN, Iran - Iran will never scrap its nuclear program, and talks with Europeans are intended to protect the country's nuclear achievements, not negotiate an end to them, an Iranian official said Wednesday. The remarks by Ali Agha Mohammadi, spokesman of Iran's powerful Supreme National Security Council, are the latest in a hardening of his country's stance amid ongoing talks with European negotiators. They also reflect Tehran's possible frustration at the lack of progress. Europe is pressing Iran for concessions on its nuclear program, which the United States claims is aimed at producing atomic weapons. In exchange for nuclear guarantees, the Europeans are offering Iran technological and financial support and talks on a trade deal. How long before action is taken?
February 3, 200521 yr Umm, hello, Mr. Annan... is anyone at the UN doing jackshit these days? 675624[/snapback] I'm not saying that the EU or the UN are doing anything substantial at all, I just hope that Iran dosent get too far along in the development of the nuke. I dont think any of us trust them with a weapon like that.
February 3, 200521 yr Author Looks like the EU policy of asking politely isn't working fast enough. 675626[/snapback] So you would say diplomacy shouldn't even be tried? What the neo-cons have shifted too normal is scaring me.
February 3, 200521 yr Looks like the EU policy of asking politely isn't working fast enough. 675626[/snapback] So you would say diplomacy shouldn't even be tried? What the neo-cons have shifted too normal is scaring me. 675640[/snapback] I don't think any one here is a "neo-con" And I hope Chewbacca is not saying that.
February 3, 200521 yr Looks like the EU policy of asking politely isn't working fast enough. 675626[/snapback] So you would say diplomacy shouldn't even be tried? What the neo-cons have shifted too normal is scaring me. 675640[/snapback] I think diplomacy should be tried, and we should give it ample time. But the situation might be dire enough to require another means to make them stop. Hopefully we dont need to think about what those means might be.
February 3, 200521 yr Author I think it was cleary implied in his sarcastic remarks about asking "politely," aka diplomacy is for whimps...shoot first ask questions never.
February 3, 200521 yr I think it was cleary implied in his sarcastic remarks about asking "politely," aka diplomacy is for whimps...shoot first ask questions never. 675651[/snapback] There's a difference between pressuring a country and asking politely. Libya didn't give up their WMD's because they were asked politely.
February 3, 200521 yr I think it was cleary implied in his sarcastic remarks about asking "politely," aka diplomacy is for whimps...shoot first ask questions never. 675651[/snapback] There's a difference between pressuring a country and asking politely. 675685[/snapback] A difference, yes, but not a difference as plain as day. You may want to clarify that in the future. :cool
February 3, 200521 yr Author I think it was cleary implied in his sarcastic remarks about asking "politely," aka diplomacy is for whimps...shoot first ask questions never. 675651[/snapback] There's a difference between pressuring a country and asking politely. Libya didn't give up their WMD's because they were asked politely. 675685[/snapback] Oh, sorry. I was unaware you had all the details on the interior workings of these negotiations.
February 3, 200521 yr Author if a country actually has WMDs, we won't go after them. 675763[/snapback] Seems intuitive to me because they might actually use them.
February 3, 200521 yr Does the UN even have any sanctions against Iran that they would go in to the country and stop them from building nukes. I mean we have them...are we supposed to stop also?
February 3, 200521 yr Does the UN even have any sanctions against Iran that they would go in to the country and stop them from building nukes. I mean we have them...are we supposed to stop also? 675794[/snapback] The UN won't even stop (or recognize) a genocide in Darfur. Surely you jest. The US is actively reducing its nuke arsenal every day, not looking to stock up. You know this. 675809[/snapback] :thumbup :thumbup :thumbup :thumbup
February 3, 200521 yr Does the UN even have any sanctions against Iran that they would go in to the country and stop them from building nukes. I mean we have them...are we supposed to stop also? 675794[/snapback] The UN won't even stop (or recognize) a genocide in Darfur. Surely you jest. The US is actively reducing its nuke arsenal every day, not looking to stock up. You know this. 675809[/snapback] and? we still have them and have zero plans to reduce our arsenal to zero. before telling other nations that they need to get rid of all of theirs we should make the same promises.
February 3, 200521 yr Author Does the UN even have any sanctions against Iran that they would go in to the country and stop them from building nukes. I mean we have them...are we supposed to stop also? 675794[/snapback] The UN won't even stop (or recognize) a genocide in Darfur. Surely you jest. The US is actively reducing its nuke arsenal every day, not looking to stock up. You know this. 675809[/snapback] How convenient. Maybe star wars has something to do with that?
February 3, 200521 yr Author Oh. And here I thought it had something to do with some sort of progressive stance on WMD.
February 3, 200521 yr Iran and Iraq are completely different siutations. First of all the Un has no muscle to enforce sanctions so thats a wasted effort. However, Europe is nervous about Iran's ambitions and if the US can allow Europe to take the lead it would be excellent. Let Europe do as they please with Iran and we'll be more than happy to help as long as it means stopping Iran from ever creating anything they can use.
February 3, 200521 yr No worries. The Israelis will take care of the situation if it gets out of hand.
February 3, 200521 yr I just wonder how long it would take Iran to build suitcase nukes....that's what I'm worried about, more than ICBM's, or mid/shortrange missiles.
February 3, 200521 yr We allowed Saddam about 13 years of "diplomacy". How much "diplomacy" do you want to allow the nutty mullahas? Given the flak for the Saddam op, maybe 50-70 years of diplomacy should do it right? :lol 675788[/snapback] were there any WMDs and ties to terrorists?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.