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.

 

EU and U.S. negotiators out! Russian in:

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
NR

posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Seems like EU has failed many times to meet up with our nuclear energy deal/porposal. This is a very good idea and I don't know why it took them so long just to figure this out
what do you guys think? I know Russia and Iran are very good allies and can work off their differences so i'm sure a good deal would come up.

Iran nuclear deal with Russia wins western approval




posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I hope for Iran's sake that the Russian inclusion into these nuclear talks succeeds. The issue is legit and definately needs addressing, especially after I read this below quoted mention:


Iran insists that it is trying to master all aspects of nuclear energy only to generate electricity. But IAEA inspectors discovered that Iran had lied for 18 years and complain that Teheran has not yet come clean. In its last report to the board of governors, the IAEA said Iran handed over a design for casting uranium into hemispheres. The only known use for such a procedure is to make the core of an atomic bomb.


At any rate, the Russian proposal has been accepted by the EU, the US, and the IAEA. It is merely a matter of Iranian acceptance.


Under the terms of the proposed deal with Russia, Iran would be allowed to continue to make UF6. But this would then have to be shipped out to Russia for enrichment in a joint venture.

This envisages Iranians having only a "management" function while Russians would control the technical aspects to ensure that only low-enriched uranium is made instead of weapons-grade material.

Iran has so far rejected the idea....

From your article

And concerning that Iranian acceptance of the Russian proposal, thus far it appears to be a 'no'. Not good for that so-called "very good allies" status between Iran and Russia, eh? Very ironic, NR, considering all of what you have mentioned in your post above.





seekerof

[edit on 24-11-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 11:26 PM
link   
If Iran wont even accept a proposal from its own Allies thats a bad sign. If even your Allies are worried about your "peaceful" nuclear program that does not bode well


cjf

posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Iran’s ‘allies’ have been watching and have very similar real concerns just as the ‘West’.

From original quoted source:



"The Russians do not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon, and agree that it would be dangerous to let Iran have an enrichment capability."


The tide may be turning away from Iran’s ‘wants’; giving way to the worlds ‘desires’:



For months, Iran has relied on Beijing and Moscow to fend off a U.S.-backed push to have it hauled before the Security Council. But the Russians are now working with the Americans and Europeans to push a compromise enrichment plan, and officials recently told AP that China also is moving closer to the Western position
AP (Thursday November 24, 2005, full article)


The time for Iran to do more listening than speaking has arrived.

.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 01:25 PM
link   
The problem with Iran giving up their nuclear weapons program is quite simple: even if they do, there is no guarantee that the US will admit it. The Iranian .gov is a thorn in our side, and we want that oil in the hands of a regime friendly to us, not the Chinese. As long as we can claim Iran has a nuke weapons program, we have an excuse for "regime change" by force. So even if Iran does completely give up it's weapons program, they still have the US threat to deal with, because even if they drop the program, the odds are quite good that the US will still claim they have one.

Now if you're Iran, do you want to face the US with a nuclear deterrent, or without one? It's a no-brainer. Without some kind of guarantee, the Iranians would be nuts to abandon their nuke weapons program. It's their only realistic hope of deterring an invasion. And that's the problem with an approach that is all stick and no carrot...



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Good idea. Russian has more experience in dealing with authoritarian regimes, so things should work out better this way.



posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by NR
I know Russia and Iran are very good allies and can work off their differences so i'm sure a good deal would come up.


NR?
Think maybe when the Russians read up on this article's mention, they might have some second-thoughts on that status of "very good allies"? What you think?



Iran is secretly training Chechen rebels in sophisticated terror techniques to enable them to carry out more effective attacks against Russian forces, the Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

Teheran 'secretly trains' Chechens to fight in Russia

Kind gives you deja vu' feeling when you consider that Iran has allegedly been doing the very same thing in Iraq that this article asserts that Iran is doing with those Chechen rebels, huh?






seekerof


NR

posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
are you a jew btw? do you spend your whole day going through the net and find every bit of information on iran as you could get? your so full of it do you even have any proof or even pictures other than BS news article you post?. It's not like your the president or your opinion matters so you could spend your whole time on this forum and say whatever you want but nothing is going to happen. First is us training chechnens, and than you say we lost russias support which we haven't and than you say iranian troops are in iraq fighting US soldiers and than you say Iran is behind 9/11 attacks, Iran is this and that give it a rest would you?.

US troops kill Iraqi civilians

[edit on 26-11-2005 by NR]

[edit on 26-11-2005 by NR]

[edit on 26-11-2005 by NR]

[edit on 26-11-2005 by NR]



posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:10 PM
link   
What I am is no concern to you, NR, is it not?
Address this issue, if you can or will, not the person or member presenting the counter information.

You have any thoughts or comments on that latest article I linked up for you to comprehend? If such is proven true, what would the impact be on that very good allies" status be? Thoughts?








seekerof


NR

posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:14 PM
link   
It's funny actually, what did you do this time? go on google and type Irans involvment in Checnya? Two can play it at that game.... How bout you respond to this?

“It’s a tragedy that U.S. soldiers have killed so many civilians in Baghdad,” said Joe Stork


US troops kill Iraqi civilian in Baghdad

Iraqs coalition Casualty doubled.






[edit on 26-11-2005 by NR]

[edit on 26-11-2005 by NR]

[edit on 26-11-2005 by NR]



posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Nice diversion, NR.
Mighty 'a' typical of you.

The article(s) you have presented has/have nothing, nada to do with this topic, hence your attempted but failed diversion of said topic and latest issue presented against your own insinuated assertions.

Whats the problem? Cannot admit that your very own nation may possibly have a hand in training Chechen rebels against Irans very own very good ally/allie Russia?

What possibly will be Russia's response to Iran if this is proven true?
What impact will it have on that "very good allies" status you so proudly throw around in varying topics?

If you cannot respond to something that IS related to your topic, I can certainly understand. Quite frustrating when you find that something you have so vehemently believed is false. Understandable, indeed.






seekerof

[edit on 26-11-2005 by Seekerof]


NR

posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:21 PM
link   
haha your such a jew man, oh yeah were training those rebels, again show me the proof we are? if we were that news would be popping everywhere and russia would of known about. Your just doing this to again make Iran look bad, well i have my ways too.

No nukes found in Iraq so far: IAEA chief



posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Read up at my initial post there, NR.
The IAEA may not have found no nuclear weapons in Iraq, but the very same IAEA has stated openly that Iran is lying, and has been doing so for 18 years over it's peaceful intent nuclear program.

Ironic, huh?





seekerof


NR

posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Read up at my initial post there, NR.
The IAEA may not have found no nuclear weapons in Iraq, but the very same IAEA has stated openly that Iran is lying, and has been doing so for 18 years over it's peaceful intent nuclear program.

Ironic, huh?



Oh so now your changing the subject? If you think about it we got our first nuclear reactor in the 70's and after U.S. sanctions we had alot of problems with it and didn't know how to run it so until somewhere around mid 90's is when we finnaly opened up new ones by getting them from Russia.



posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:35 PM
link   
So basically you are saying that the IAEA is mistaken in stating that Iran has been lying about its peaceful intent nuclear program for 18 years?

Think about it, k, cause if you say that the IAEA is wrong or mistaken, then consider the implications of the IAEA being mistaken in relation to that off-topic IAEA-Iraq article you linked up.








seekerof


NR

posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
So basically you are saying that the IAEA is mistaken in stating that Iran has been lying about its peaceful intent nuclear program for 18 years?

Think about it, k, cause if you say that the IAEA is wrong or mistaken, then consider the implications of the IAEA being mistaken in relation to that off-topic IAEA-Iraq article you linked up.





First off all we had a nuclear technology for like the past 20 years but all those ones were american made and we needed new ones so like I said around mid 90's we went to Russia to get them, as for nuclear weapons you don't have any proof we have them so I think you should just be quiet, stop making your little false accusations or opinion saying we have nukes when you got nothing to proove it!!!



posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Again, are you saying that the IAEA is mistaken in stating that Iran has been lying about its peaceful intent nuclear program for 18 years?





seekerof


NR

posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Again, are you saying that the IAEA is mistaken in stating that Iran has been lying about its peaceful intent nuclear program for 18 years?



Man your such an idiot!!! IAEA just said we been hiding our nuclear program for 18 years but they haven't found any proof of WMD's in Iran so again your mistaken, your opinion doesn't matter to anyone and you dont make the decision for the US so i'm sure we all could care less.



posted on Nov, 26 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
This is not about me or my opinion on this matter, NR.
This is about you, Iran, and the IAEA.
The IAEA is the one that said that Iran has been lying about its peaceful intent nuclear program for 18 years, not me. Hence, I fail to see how I am mistaken.

Is what the IAEA asserts true or false, NR?



Iran insists that it is trying to master all aspects of nuclear energy only to generate electricity. But IAEA inspectors discovered that Iran had lied for 18 years and complain that Teheran has not yet come clean. In its last report to the board of governors, the IAEA said Iran handed over a design for casting uranium into hemispheres. The only known use for such a procedure is to make the core of an atomic bomb.






seekerof

[edit on 26-11-2005 by Seekerof]


NR

posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   
If you answer me on this than i'll answer yours!! even tough you think IAEA said were lying about our nuclear program with no proof than how should it raise concern? just admit it that theres no proof and theres nothing you can do about it.

[edit on 27-11-2005 by NR]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join