It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: U.S. Backs Peaceful Iranian Nuclear Program

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   
The U.S. announced for the first time its support for a peaceful Iranian nuclear program today. The apparent shift in policy states that while the U.S. is still suspicious that Iran wants to use civilian nuclear technology to build nuclear weapons, they do have the right to build civilian nuclear power plants. The statement was meant to support renewed European efforts in dealing with Iran over its nuclear program.
 



today .reuters.com
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States on Friday explicitly accepted for the first time that Iran can develop civilian nuclear programs, backing an EU proposal to allow Tehran to pursue atomic power in exchange for giving up fuel work.

In a compromise that completed a gradual shift in U.S. policy, Washington acquiesced because it believes the EU offer has enough safeguards to prevent Iran from diverting its civilian work into making nuclear bombs.

"We support the (Europeans') effort and the proposal they have put forward to find a diplomatic solution to this problem and to seek an end to Iran's nuclear weapons program," State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


This shows that the U.S. is certainly open to negotiations to the Iranian nuclear situation and isn't just looking for an excuse for war. I hope that the Europeans' efforts will prove fruitful, but I'm certainly not holding my breath. I still can't understand myself why Iran needs a nuclear program, when they have huge fossil fuel reserves.

[edit on 8/5/2005 by djohnsto77]

[edit on 6-8-2005 by John bull 1]

[edit on 9-8-2005 by John bull 1]




posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:43 PM
link   
You do know that there is almost twice the population in Iran than there is in Canada. And yes, WE have nuclear power. Not getting it. Substitute snow for sand and it makes sense.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
This shows that the U.S. is certainly open to negotiations to the Iranian nuclear situation and isn't just looking for an excuse for war. I hope that the Europeans' efforts will prove fruitful, but I'm certainly not holding my breath. I still can't understand myself why Iran needs a nuclear program, when they have huge fossil fuel reserves.


This could be the problem, why is the US setting themselves up as the statute that decides who will be a nuclear power?



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:38 PM
link   
I am personally against almost all nuclear technology - until they get Fusion down-pat that is... But I think we should either:



  1. All have nuclear power and weapons, or
  2. None of us have nuclear power and weapons


What frustrates me almost to the point of insanity - is why the US has proclaimed itself the "Worlds Watchdog" - why do they have the right to choose... Its rediculous... We all know its to have world power in the favour... But still... Maybe the NWO called off the war with Iran for a few years...



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
You do know that there is almost twice the population in Iran than there is in Canada. And yes, WE have nuclear power. Not getting it. Substitute snow for sand and it makes sense.


And Canada in turn has 3 times higher population then belgium and Belgium also has nuclear powerplants and several Nuclear research centers.

Not to mention we actualy do have nukes in belgium too. They belong to the US, but we do have nukes!

[edit on 5-8-2005 by thematrix]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I dont understand why everyone is so against Iran having any nuclear power at all? Sure they have tons of oil but nuclear power is far less damaging to the enviornment. As long as they cooperate with IAEA regulations and inspections and don't develop nuclear weapons there is absolutely no reason they should not be allowed nuclear reactors. If the USA / Israel blows up their nuclear reactor sites then they will be the the ones declaring war, not the Iranians as the mass media would have us believe.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix

Originally posted by intrepid
You do know that there is almost twice the population in Iran than there is in Canada. And yes, WE have nuclear power. Not getting it. Substitute snow for sand and it makes sense.


And Canada in turn has 3 times higher population then belgium and Belgium also has nuclear powerplants and several Nuclear research centers.


That's my point. Thank you.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:55 PM
link   
I don't think population size is an important factor. Nobody in his right mind would expect Canada, Belgium, etc. to start nuking countries but I can't say the same thing about Iran.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:42 PM
link   
Being agreeable to this may give us an "in" as far as monitoiring usage.
I mean, if we say NO, how much of an opportunity will we have to take a peek, now and then?



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Well, anyone with real knowldge of politics would also know that there is not a country in the world right now that would just start nuking other countries. The closest chance of that happening right now are Pakistan and India over Kashmir and Jammu, both U.S. allies as you may know.
Fact of the matter is, Iran is not seeking nuclear capacity to use as agression towards any sovereign state, including Israel. Simply nonsense.

Fact of the matter is, utilizing nuclear power in a fossil-fuel rich nation gives them the option to make a large income on an item they will be able to depend on less, while still meeting their own energy needs. This extra income would help them fund public programs and furhter develop their infrastructure. In my opinion the pursuit for nuclear energy is simply an economical desire. They have every right.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 12:15 AM
link   
And that too Pakistan nuking India.. not vice-versa..
India has a no-first-use policy..
Also I think that the US has finally come to terms with the fact that one day there will be a nuclear Iran..



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 01:02 AM
link   
What I find suspicious about this and potentially the greatest evidence is exactly what you said djohnsto77. Why do they need it, its a dangerous messy technology, that is just going to cause suspicion and problems and the Iranians have to know that.


It isn't nessaceraly a question of the country possesing nukes. It's the goverments relation to your country, Iran could be a potential threat. Which im not going to go into! If canada posses nuclear technology theres nothing to be fearful about. The United States interest in who possess nuclear weapon's is understandable. If I were the president I'd feel the same.



ghostsoldier
What frustrates me almost to the point of insanity - is why the US has proclaimed itself the "Worlds Watchdog" - why do they have the right to choose... Its rediculous... We all know its to have world power in the favour... But still... Maybe the NWO called off the war with Iran for a few years...



Say you take a stance where you dont care who has nukes and they know it, everyone in the world will have them. Next minute there leaking into the hands of large criminal, religious or terrorist organizations, possibly even civilians. The increase of nuclear accidents would be way up, which would effect everyone, nukes randomly blasting off in countries ran by dictators would make unpredictable damage to the would economy.

America should police the world in this way, a devastating weapon although, possibly nessacary at the time they were created. Should be controlled by the creators. It also makes sense that there be some kind of control. Though the irony of nuclear weapons is the fact that there most destructive weapon ever created, but also arguably something that has kept peace as a deterant for almost 60years now.

Would you want a random mad man easily obtaining atomic/nuclear weaponry?

Vorta



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 01:19 AM
link   
The USA is not that stupid. The reason they are capitulating on this point is only because of the need for some allies and they are getting heavy diplomatic pressure, but they must also have a firm confidence that they have a way to reliably monitor what is done there. The US must need something from the other countries to capitulate and have confidence that they can contain the progress of development. No one who is sane wants anyone associated with Wahabbism to have a finger on any button except a TV remote control. Someone might snease!



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 03:33 AM
link   
I think that this is a smart move on the part of the administration, for several reasons. I don't think that the Americans could take Iran or North Korea now even if they wanted to. The army is way too overstretched. Besides who the hell wants to go to war with Iran? Their technology may not be as good, but just like the Americans they love their country and would fight to the death against an invader. You have only to look at the Iran Iraq war.

Getting back on track. The Iranian political rhetoric has up until now centered around how they want Nuclear power for peacefull purposes. I believe this to be a lie for several reasons. One, the US now surrounds them with bases in most of their neighbouring countries. Two, Israel, a major US ally has access to many many warheads which could reduce Iran to slag if Israel so desired. Three, the Iranian leadership has seen that the current administration will lie, cheat, and do whatever it takes to get their way. Having seen what is happening with North Korea i.e. the US won't dare invade there because they do have WMD, they have reached the conclusion that in order to survive, they need the big boys toys. You can't however in this modern world come out and say that you want Nukes, its just isn't done. There would be a political sh*tstorm which would isolate Iran in the way North Korea has been isolated. Since Iran wants to be a regional power, indeed, it has started to take steps to achieve this (the Iranians are a lot smarter than people give them credit for) this would be an unacceptable course of action. Hence they have come out saying that they want this Nuclear power program. It is my opinion that they were hoping to make this program quickly and get enough hardware on the ground so that they could produce a bomb before the rest of the world moved to counter this.

So now for the US to say, yes we will help you get your civilian power plan is a smart move because, it defuses the situation. It allows the US to monitor what is going on in Iran and it keeps a Nuclear weapon out of the hands of someone the US considers and enemy.

Another way to look at this is that this is what the Iranians wanted all along, i.e. assistance with their energy needs and knowing that they couldn't just ask for it (the hardliners in the Government would never have that!) they have manoevered it so that help has been thrust upon them. If this is the case, (which I feel it may also be) then it is a smashing success for the Iranians.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 07:10 AM
link   
To the news poster :

you mention `huge fossil fuel reserves`

well - what if the usa wants access to those reserves - since the worlds cheap oil is running out - so they support a nuclear reactor , the usa looks good , and gets cheap oil



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 07:47 AM
link   

posted by managerie
No one who is sane wants anyone associated with Wahabbism to have a finger on any button except a TV remote control. Someone might snease!


Wahabbism is a Saudi concept and is prevalent in Sunni Islam not Shia, which is what Iran is.

I think before spouting off comments about how "evil" and "dangerous" Iran is, some research into them might be fruitful.

What is wrong with them having Nuclear power? if they have this, they can sell their Oil for profit to develop there country and not be dependent on something that will, ultimately, run out.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 07:54 AM
link   


The statement was meant to support renewed European efforts in dealing with Iran over its nuclear program.


Erm...well, that didn't work



Iran has rejected the latest European proposals for resolving concerns over the country's nuclear programme.

The US had backed the package, which includes a proposal to let Iran develop a civilian nuclear programme if it halts uranium enrichment activities.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


news.bbc.co.uk...

also note, Britain, France and Germany have called an emergency meeting of the UN's nuclear agency on Tuesday



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
...also note, Britain, France and Germany have called an emergency meeting of the UN's nuclear agency on Tuesday

Does this mean that the EU is now 'bad cop'.

As an aside, a bloke on the BBC the other night speculated that the current 'crisis' would be 'solved' by the new Iranian President, hence making him look good to the Iranian people.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   


Does this mean that the EU is now 'bad cop'.

As an aside, a bloke on the BBC the other night speculated that the current 'crisis' would be 'solved' by the new Iranian President, hence making him look good to the Iranian people.


i dont know,

we will have to wait to Tuesday and see what is said at the meeting.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
we will have to wait to Tuesday and see what is said at the meeting.

Absolutely. Could be interesting!



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join