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: Iran Throws Down Gauntlet in Nuclear Row

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Ive got a novel idea, lets promise the Iranians that if they give up their nuclear ambitions, we the West will start adhering to our obligations as proscribed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. You remember, the clause that says that we have to dismantle our nuclear arsenals. Give me one good reason why we can flout the NPT whilst ramming it down the throat of Iran?

Lets see, how many countries have peaceful nuclear programs with no ambitions for nuclear weapons?

Argentina
Armenia
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Canada
Czech Republic
Finland
Germany
Hungary
Japan
South Korea
Lithuania
Mexico
Netherlands
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine

www.world-nuclear.org...

All of the above have nuclear powerplants and have not gone for nuclear weapons. Just why is it again that Iran is incapable of having nuclear power plants? Or having the specifically allow under the NPT right to generate its own nuclear fuel? Could it be because they produce oil so they have no need for nuclear power? Wait a minute, the USA has vast domestic oil supplies but currently generates 20% of its electricity with nuclear power plants. Oh yeah and the United Kingdom has domestic gas and oil supplies but 19% of its electricity comes from nuclear power plants. More double standards is it?

Or cant Iran have access to nuclear power simply because the United States doesnt trust them. Where ever does the American-Iranian animosity come from? Did it materialize out of thin air or is it all the Iranians fault? No, it actually originated with America's support for a King whilst Iranians wanted a democracy. When the Iranians learnt that the American's were actively trying to save the Iranian monarchy they surprisingly didnt welcome American interference. Hey, how would American's view Iranians if they helped the British supress the American revolution? Americans wouldnt be too happy with Iranian intervention would they?

Iran, incidently, has not broken the NPT at all. All this heresay about clandestine nuclear programs and weapons research has never once been backed up with EVIDENCE by the United States. All we hear about the accusations is "strong belief" this and "strong belief" that. Sorry Bush and company, but you need more than strong beliefs of something before referal to the Security Council.

Until then, we should mind our own damn business.

[edit on 18/9/05 by subz]




posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz
Ive got a novel idea, lets promise the Iranians that if they give up their nuclear ambitions, we the West will start adhering to our obligations as proscribed ...........


Do your really think the US will broker its interests and power in the name of fairness?

It's not going to happen. Maybe if the next Presidential election brought in a 3rd party it could change some and that's a slight some, cause transnationals dictate the final say and not Unkie Sambo.

I more apt to believe we shall see full bore global war before political corruption is eradicated.

Got nukes?

[edit on 18-9-2005 by Regenmacher]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by psyopswatcher
Not a reason in the world ANY country can't have energy nuclear power to make life a little better all around. So we showed them the way to use it for force also.
Well some countries are in too much political and religous strife too want to use Nuclear technology for just energy, speaking hypotheticaly what if the US when we were a developing nation wanted to start making uh chemical weapons(hypotheticaly speaking) Britain France all of the "Powers" would not have wanted us to have this tech. My point is developing nations are constantly struggling against something so Nuclear tech would be bad because they would use it against whatever the adversary is.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   

as posted by subz
Iran, incidently, has not broken the NPT at all. All this heresay about clandestine nuclear programs and weapons research has never once been backed up with EVIDENCE by the United States. All we hear about the accusations is "strong belief" this and "strong belief" that. Sorry Bush and company, but you need more than strong beliefs of something before referal to the Security Council.

Until then, we should mind our own damn business.

What CrackerJack box did you pull the above out of?

You only assert the "United States", and fail to mention that this has been the effort, first and foremost, of and by the European Union, and that the effort to get Iran and their nuclear quest brought before the UN Security Council is being lead by the UK.
How ludicrous and unfactual, though not surprising coming from you. Have you asked for evidence from the EU?!


Britain will lead a drive to have Iran referred to the UN security council, with the possibility of sanctions being imposed if the newly elected hardline president does not stop uranium enrichment or restart negotiations with Europe and America. Reflecting the level of concern about Iran's intentions, foreign secretary Jack Straw was due to meet President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday on the sidelines of the United Nations summit to try to resolve the stand-off. Mr Straw was making a joint approach with French prime minister Dominique de Villepin and German foreign minister Joschka Fischer.


You then go with this from another thread dealing with this issue:


Think for yourself, read what Iran is actually like and stop demonizing entire nations based on highly erroneous government fodder.

Another CrackerJack prize.
What Iran is like, in regards to its society and inner daily workings, has no bearing whatsoever on how the Iranian mullah government intends to do with this peaceful use of nuclear energy, subz. You speak of "demonizing" a nation, while you continue to demonize the US and its current administration and company, amounting to nothing but hypocritical doublespeak.

Here's a radical thought to counter your novel idea:
How about Iran sign off, before the entire UN, that in return for only a peaceful use nuclear energy program, they cannot pursue or acquire nuclear weapon capabilities. That as long as they keep with peaceful use [ie: the NPT], things will be okie dokie, but if they acquire or build nuclear weapons, that Iran will simply become neutralized, by way of a horde of neutron detonations. That work for you? Probably not, for every nation should have equal right and opportunity to acquire and use nuclear energy, along with every nation having the right to pursue and acquire a nuclear weapons program and arsenal, huh?





seekerof

[edit on 18-9-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
What CrackerJack box did you pull the above out of?



The US has criticised an independent investigation which found no evidence that Iran was working on a secret nuclear weapons programme.

[...]

However, a US state department spokesman said the report did nothing to reduce their concern at Iran's nuclear programme.

He listed a series of what he called "unresolved concerns", which included Iran's alleged dealings with clandestine nuclear procurement networks and the Bush administration's strong belief that Iran was developing and pursuing a nuclear weapon.

news.bbc.co.uk...


Iran is continuing to pursue the production and possession of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, despite being a signatory to international treaties banning them, said Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton.

[...]

The under secretary described in detail the basis for the Bush administration's strong belief that Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons, despite being a signatory to the Nonproliferation Treaty.

www.usembassy.it...

Lots and lots of rhetoric coming out of Washington about their "strong belief" that Iran is trying to produce nuclear weapons. I didnt pull it from a crackjack box, as can be seen from the above quotes. The reason I single out the United States for criticism and not the EU is quite simple really. The United States is not negotiating with Iran whilst the EU is negotiating. Also the United States is accusing Iran, without evidence, that they are trying to build nuclear weapons whilst all the EU has said is that they wish they would dump their fuel cycle program. Show me an EU country that has accused Iran of trying to build nuclear weapons.


Originally posted by Seekerof
You only assert the "United States", and fail to mention that this has been the effort, first and foremost, of and by the European Union, and that the effort to get Iran and their nuclear quest brought before the UN Security Council is being lead by the UK.
How ludicrous and unfactual, though not surprising coming from you. Have you asked for evidence from the EU?!

I think I answered that above. Im asserting nothing, the accusations and strong belief of the American administration is on the record for anyone to see. Also the efforts of the EU are to get Iran to drop its nuclear fuel cycle program in exchange for fuel aid and other such incentives. There is no such position coming from the Whitehouse, they are "allowing" the EU to negotiate and if that fails they are straight to the UNSC to push for sanctions. Rather a different approach between the EU and America, wouldnt you say?


Originally posted by Seekerof
Another CrackerJack prize.

No. My problem is with American baseless accusations that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons. Neither Britain nor the EU has accused Iran of building nuclear weapons. They just want them to cease their nuclear fuel cycle activities which is allowed to them under the NPT (which is a different matter). I view this as the EU trying to avert a showdown between Iran and the United States due to US belligerence and unsupported "strong beliefs".


Originally posted by Seekerof
What Iran is like, in regards to its society and inner daily workings, has no bearing whatsoever on how the Iranian mullah government intends to do with this peaceful use of nuclear energy, subz.

That is a fair comment but unless you have a crystal ball you have no grounds to make the assumption that the Mullahs will go for nuclear weapons. Would the mullah's give up their grip on power by getting nuclear weapons and launching them? Do you think they are oblivous to the fact that as soon as they lauched any nuclear missiles they and their country would be turned to glass?


Originally posted by Seekerof
You speak of "demonizing" a nation, while you continue to demonize the US and its current administration and company, amounting to nothing but hypocritical doublespeak.

Ha! I have never demonized the citizens of the United States. Ever. I have given evidence of just what the current U.S administration is up to and if I see it as evil I will say so. Its not doublespeak at all, I see the Bush administration as the single biggest threat to World Peace and an abomination and blight on America's good name.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Here's a radical thought to counter your novel idea:
How about Iran sign off, before the entire UN, that in return for only a peaceful use nuclear energy program, they cannot pursue or acquire nuclear weapon capabilities. That as long as they keep with peaceful use [ie: the NPT], things will be okie dokie, but if they acquire or build nuclear weapons, that Iran will simply become neutralized, by way of a horde of neutron detonations.

Yeah thats a good idea. What were you saying about Iranian civilians having nothing to do with the actions of the Mullahs? Yet you're willing to kill 70 million innocent Iranians due to the actions of a few mullahs? Right...

The bare facts, according to the NPT, is that the Iranians have done nothing that contravenes the NPT. There have been unsupported accusations from the United States government saying the Iranians are pursuing nuclear weapons. To this date no evidence to back up this claim has been given to the World. Until that time comes I stand by my comments that the United States should "put up or shut up" with regards to saying the Iranians are aiming for nuclear weapons.


Originally posted by Seekerof
That work for you?

No. Killing 70 million people does not work for me.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Probably not, for every nation should have equal right and opportunity to acquire and use nuclear energy, along with every nation having the right to pursue and acquire a nuclear weapons program and arsenal, huh?

Yes that is correct. If the current nuclear powers are unwilling to dismantle their nuclear arsenals as demanded by the NPT they are in no position to tell other countries what to do with regards to nuclear weapons. If we see some signs that the nuclear powers are willing to negotiate their nuclear weapons away I would then change my stance on other nations acquiring nuclear weapons.

But until that great day when the nuclear powers agree to destroy their nuclear weapons arsenals in their entirety, I see the best chance of World peace coming about by nuclear parity for all nations.

Half assed measures where a handful of coutries posses nuclear weapons is not conducive to world stability because situations arise where belligerent nations think they can demand that sovereign nations do as they wish. This can only result in more conflicts.

[edit on 18/9/05 by subz]



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Jong folds his hand and Chavez issues psuedo-apology. Must be a lot of things working behind the scenes. Will Iran cave next?


news.bbc.co.uk

N Korea 'to abandon nuclear work'
North Korea's Yongbyon plant could be opened to inspection
North Korea has agreed to give up all its nuclear activities and rejoin the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, according to negotiators in Beijing.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.




abcnews.go.com

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Saturday that he would attempt to improve his relations with Washington, which have been rocky in recent months.

"Sometimes I make mistakes, I tend to respond to any official from the government of Mr. Bush who verbally attacks Venezuela," Chavez said during a speech at a Manhattan church, his last public event in New York before heading to Cuba to meet with his close ally Fidel Castro.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


[edit on 19-9-2005 by Regenmacher]



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Britian is the US's little lapdog... how soon we forget the Downing Street Memo?

John Bolton is now the US UN Ambassador, Condi's lapdog? Condi Rice of Iraqi mushroom cloud fame? How soon we forget again.

They cried wolf 3 years ago and how many are dead and dying in Iraq?

Yes, NK has folded it's hand, but they've been testing their nukes for how long now? Couple years I'd hazard to guess. Jong seems to be playing it cool now that Iran is in the sites?

When do we start hearing of 'mushroom cloud' picturesque? Who's got the tag on the tag team this time?

Although fully legal under the NPT, when I think of the disarmament/dismantling that has happened in the US over the decades, the underlying purpose seems to be, whilst looking like good guys, to get rid of the old so the War Machine can bring in the new...

Keep them wheels rolling...

rolling, rolling, rolling....



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join