one of U.S close allie is now with Iran on Nuclear issue.

U.S. threatens India over Iranian nuclear issue

WASHINGTON (AFP) -- The United States has raised concerns with India about its reported opposition to refer Iran to the UN Security Council over Tehran's nuclear program, the State Department said on Thursday.

"We have registered our concerns with the Indian government of course," Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns told a Congressional hearing where legislators threatened to call for a review of Washington's landmark civil nuclear cooperation pact with New Delhi.

Burns said that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would also raise the issue in her meetings with her Indian counterpart Natwar Singh and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during the UN Summit next week.

Singh reportedly said at a meeting with Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad earlier this week that New Delhi was opposed to referring Tehran to the UN Security Council.

U.S. and European Union officials have warned they will push for Iran's nuclear case to be sent to the Security Council – which could impose sanctions -- if Tehran does not halt all nuclear fuel work and resume negotiations with the European Union.

Iran denies harboring secret plans to make nuclear bombs and says it has no intention of freezing uranium conversion at its Isfahan plant -- where UN seals were broken and work resumed last month. Democratic Representative Tom Lantos referred Burns to news reports quoting Singh as lamenting to the Iranian leader about "the inclination to infuse injustice in international relations" and that "India's relations with Iran is not predicated on positions and views attributed to some governments."

Lantos said Singh was clearly accusing the United States of practicing injustice, adding that "this is sickening, literally sickening, which we don't accept from the Indian foreign minister."

He said if New Delhi did not support Washington's bid to refer Iran to the Security Council, the Bush administration should freeze its agreement to expand nuclear cooperation with India.

The nuclear pact, which could only be implemented after Congress amended certain U.S. laws, is part of a bold strategic partnership announced by U.S. President George W. Bush after talks with Prime Minister Singh in July.

"This pattern of dealing with us will not be productive for India and they have to be told in plain English that this great new opening which we support is predicated on reciprocity.

"In this case they are not only opposing our views, they are opposing views of Britain, Germany and France," Lantos said.

"If they persist in this, this great dream of a new relationship will go down the tubes," warned the ranking Democrat on the House of Representatives international relations committee, which held the hearing Thursday.

Iran ended a freeze on its uranium conversion activities in retaliation to demands from Britain, France and Germany – also known as the EU-3 -- that it scrap the program in exchange for a package of incentives.



www.tehrantimes.com.../10/2005&Cat=2&Num=4

Great topic, but where's your input? You should do more than just paste quotes and a link to start a thread

...westy....bottom of the qoute...hint hint....

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Great topic, but where's your input? You should do more than just paste quotes and a link to start a thread

well i basiclly did state my input which is the topic, just posted some basic news that more countrys are starting to be in irans side .

Originally posted by NR

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Great topic, but where's your input? You should do more than just paste quotes and a link to start a thread

well i basiclly did state my input which is the topic, just posted some basic news that more countrys are starting to be in irans side

.

They need all the backin up they can get to avoide US aggression and eventuallly US invasion.
India also found out that Abdul Qadeer Khan, the nuclear scientist that helped pakistan with nuclear technology, had ongoing relations with the CIA.
Also the CIA helped him to avoid criminal charges emposed by a european court of justice.
Every country in the world knows that the US cant be trusted but many have not the goolies to stand up to them, quess India does has the goolies

I've seen a couple of these types of articles on ATS lately. The first paragraph plays hop skotch with the truth then the rest of the article equates to "THIS MEANS THEY'RE GOING TO KILL US ALL".

I need to check the sources but i'm sure I saw an almost indentical article in terms of structure, tone and intent about China yesterday.

Anyhoo, random hole picked in the article:

-- where UN seals were broken and work resumed last month.

...legally under the supervision of the IAEA




Checked.. here it is: www.abovetopsecret.com...
First para of the article in question is about completely legal activity. Rest of the article? The intent?

"THIS MEANS THEY WANT TO KILL US ALL!"


[edit on 9-9-2005 by kegs]

werent they suppose to sanction Iran on September 3rd? and how come they arent doing it anytime soon because i'm really getting tired of this, lets just get this over with!.

The US can’t sanction Iran because some of the countries on the Security Council are in bed with Iran, the US basically only has one real option left.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The US can’t sanction Iran because some of the countries on the Security Council are in bed with Iran, the US basically only has one real option left.

You mean the option where the US grows up and stops trying to control everything? Becuase unless it is that, the problem isn't the UN or anything to do with any bed's..

Yes what is that option westie do tell please.

Because you honestly can't mean war. Face it man we are overextended militarilly, facing a looming oil and budgetary crisis, and we have lost completelly whatever moral authority we once had in one fell swoop when some moron in HLS denied foreign aid workers and aid for a week after katrina.

It might be unpleasant to hear but the plain truth is most of our "allies" are bailing because noone wants to be hitched to a nation on it's way down. That and our consistent alienation of every ally we have through fatally boneheaded diplomatic maneuvers probably makes many of them eager to get away from us.

Make no mistake I am by no means saying we are down for the count. But I am saying if we continue in the current vein we're as good as done being a real power very shortly.

The real option that the US has it to act unilaterally if necessary, and stop Iran form acquiring nuclear weapons. Now, do we have to necessarily invade them to do this? Of course not, but, even the alternatives aren't to popular, so the US should figure out what's the best way to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons and go with it. And I agree, invading them now would not be too smart.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The real option that the US has it to act unilaterally if necessary, and stop Iran form acquiring nuclear weapons. Now, do we have to necessarily invade them to do this? Of course not, but, even the alternatives aren't to popular, so the US should figure out what's the best way to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons and go with it. And I agree, invading them now would not be too smart.

( Removed comment)

[edit on 11-9-2005 by asala]