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: Russia to Evacuate its Officials from Iran.

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2006 @ 08:46 PM
link   
The EU has decided to break off negotiations with Iran on it's nuclear program and instead have decided unilaterally to present the Iranian dossier to the UN Security Council next week in London. Russia, which was initially opposed to presenting the case to the UN, has cut off it's negotiations on the sale of S-300 complexes to Iran, is preparing an evacuation plan for Russian specialists, and as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made clear; Russia will support the proposal to present the case to the UN
 



www.kommersant.com


The Europeans have decided to stop negotiating. Foreign Ministers (from left to right) Philippe Douste-Blazy of France, Jack Straw of Great Britain and Frank-Walter Steinmeier of Germany with Javier Solana of the European Union.

Kommersant has learned that the Russian military delegation has Teheran, cutting off negotiations on the sale of S-300 complexes to it. An evacuation plan for the Russian specialists working in Iran is being developed in Moscow.
Russia Washes Its Hands

The biggest news yesterday was that Russia supported the West's position on Iran. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov criticized Iran with unprecedented severity on radio station Ekho Moskvy. He confirmed that Western countries intended to hold an unscheduled meeting of the IAEA to discuss Iran within weeks. Lavrov made it clear that Russia would support the proposal to forward the dossier on Iran to the UN Security Council, even though Moscow had opposed that step until now.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Britain, Germany, France and Russia are siding with the U.S. and other countries in this issue, let's see how long they will all maintain this position.

Something of note from that article is also another statement by Lavrov.


“We shouldn't forget that Iran has a rather developed missile program,” Lavrov pointed out. “Medium- and long-range missiles. The continual declarations by Iranian leaders about Israel add fuel to the fire. It all adds to the political arguments of those who say that Iran can be communicated with only through the UN Security Council.”


Excerpted from original link.

Continuing reading the story on the original link i found the following.


At first, Russia preferred to make a deal with Iran for the sale of 29 Tor-M1 complexes for $700 million. That contract was signed at the end of last year and evoked a reaction throughout the world. A defense industry source told Kommersant that “Moscow wanted to test the international reaction by signing a contract to sell Tors as a cover for S-300s.” The next move was to sell Teheran five divisions of S-300MPU-1 ballistic antiaircraft missiles for $800 million. That contract was scheduled for signing in March.

However, as tension over Iran mounted, it was understood in Moscow that it would not be possible to sell ballistic missiles to Iran – they wouldn't understand in the West. Now Russia is hoping to resell the same S-300MPU-1 complexes to Algeria.


The question is, did Russian officials decide to cut off negotiations with Iran because they really thought it was the right thing to do?; or was this step taken so that Russia could wash it's hands on the proliferation of ballistic missiles to Teheran, who has continuously called for the destruction of Israel and certain targets in the west?

I also found the following interesting.


The Iranians are equally decisive. A Russian government source told Kommersant that they became convinced in Moscow after a Russian Security Council delegation visited Teheran that the Iranians are not bluffing and intend to stand up for their right to develop a nuclear program. Russian negotiators in Teheran said that the Iranian authorities have decided not to avoid direct military confrontation if things come to that. In Moscow, they think that an American armed action could begin this year.


This sounds like another warning, or warnings, the Russians gave to the U.S. since 9/11 and up to the beginning of the war in Iraq. It almost feels like the Russians want this war to happen, just like the war in Iraq when they continuously provided evidence from their intelligence agencies, and from the mouth of Putin himself that Saddam's regime was planning on making terrorist attacks on U.S soil.





[edit on 1-14-2006 by Valhall]

[edit on 15-1-2006 by Thomas Crowne]




posted on Jan, 13 2006 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Way to go Russia.


Perhaps now Iran will get the message that mainstream nations will not stand for their outlandish behavior.



posted on Jan, 13 2006 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Maybe Russia was in it originally to help Iran's nuclear program for the construction money, but now I think they are using Iran as a way to draw us deeper into yet another war. They know we will not stand for Iran gaining nuclear capability, and we will have to deal with them, which will spread our forces thinner, and waste more of our money and we will get further into debt. Half of all the conflicts in the Middle East are due to the Russian proliferation of weapons. They sell them dirt cheap, then walk away and wash their hands of the matter. Meanwhile our soldiers are dieing by those Russian made weapons and we are getting further into debt.

And I thought the Cold War was over.



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Spread us thinner and/or draw us into a limited nuclear war, while Russia supplies the arms and warheads to the mullahs.

Wonder what China will do when their Iranian oil contracts are voided and we dust asia with fallout from bunker buster nukes? Makes me wonder how much DU is flying in those sand storms that sweep into Asia already. Makes me wonder how many times we can pull the plug on China's oil deals before they react.

As for Israel, only takes one nuke to drop in Tel Aviv before you see 200 more being used in retaliation. Oil wars are going to prove Marx was right.



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 04:32 AM
link   


shots
Way to go Russia.

Perhaps now Iran will get the message that mainstream nations will not stand for their outlandish behavior.


not supprising the Russians would do this

now all the EU has to do is get china not to veto anything thrown at them



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 07:30 AM
link   
BTW what happened to my submission? i recieved an email saying it was upgraded but I still see it as a submission.



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Hmm. Think we need a quick history review here.

Back in 1989 or so, Russia went capitalist. The communist government was dismantled. Government assets like munitions were unprotected. Government-employed nuclear physicists lost their jobs.

The arms were sold by entrepreneurs; most ended up in the middle East. Many unemployed Russian phsyicists found work in the middle East.

It's capitalism in action boys. Not a conspiracy, just good business.





posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 08:09 AM
link   
I wont say 'way to go Russia' because this is Russia we are talking about !!
I say this because after the fall of the USSR and the Russian weapons K-mart the US is seen as an effective marketing tool to scare nations into buying their cheap weapon systems. Now that they realize that the Iranians are going down they want to make this a political gimmick.
There is another possibility of the Israelis playing politics with the Russians and making them back off from Iran. Maybe threaten the Kremlin of handing the Chechnya’s some Israeli equipment as "complimentary" samples!!
The Russians did pretty much the same with Iraqi, selling them weapons until the nth minute and when war was called backing off and acting all 'good guy'.
The Chinese wont put up much of a fight I think with this resolution and Iran might face sanctions which would cripple their economy right when it is beginning to open up now. China is trying to get the EU, as one of its major export destinations and any Chinese reticence on this matter will be detrimental to china.
The Russians are doing last minute maneuverings to retail their pseudo-sanctimonious position internationally. Its a dog eat dog world and everyone wants to come out a winner, the only real losers here will be Iran and the mullahs if they cant learn to hold their tongues.



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 08:20 AM
link   

IAF101
the US is seen as an effective marketing tool to scare nations into buying their cheap weapon systems.


Exactly the dynamic, IMO.





Now that they realize that the Iranians are going down they want to make this a political gimmick.


I agree. The writing is on the wall, and Russia is repositioning.




There is another possibility of the Israelis playing politics with the Russians and making them back off from Iran. Maybe threaten the Kremlin of handing the Chechnya’s some Israeli equipment as "complimentary" samples!!


Or the US. This is hardball.




The Russians are doing last minute maneuverings to retail their pseudo-sanctimonious position internationally.


"Pseudo-sanctimonious" is a word that applies to several players in this game, IMO.




Its a dog eat dog world and everyone wants to come out a winner, the only real losers here will be Iran and the mullahs if they cant learn to hold their tongues.


The only real winners are the corporations who manufacture the weapons.

The real losers are all of us - we'll be choking on the radioactive dust circulating around the world. Remember the jet stream?






posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   
If you notice in the article these deals sound to me like they are government sanctioned. I do not see any references to any corporate company names. Every mention in the article references either Russia or Moscow.


from the article

At first, Russia preferred to make a deal with Iran for the sale of 29 Tor-M1 complexes for $700 million. That contract was signed at the end of last year and evoked a reaction throughout the world. A defense industry source told Kommersant that “Moscow wanted to test the international reaction by signing a contract to sell Tors as a cover for S-300s.” The next move was to sell Teheran five divisions of S-300MPU-1 ballistic antiaircraft missiles for $800 million. That contract was scheduled for signing in March.

However, as tension over Iran mounted, it was understood in Moscow that it would not be possible to sell ballistic missiles to Iran – they wouldn't understand in the West. Now Russia is hoping to resell the same S-300MPU-1 complexes to Algeria.

Bold emphasis added.

It may be capitalism at it's finest, but it also looks to me like they are stirring the pot.

I would agree that US defense contractors are just as bad by selling arms to other countries just as Russia is doing, and they are doing it just for the money. If a war in Iran would break out just think of all the new orders for weapons that would start coming in.

IMHO, I think all of the players involved are nuts, and this WOT is getting out of control. I think to cool things down, there should be an international ban on all sales of weapons in the area. But we know that ain't gonna happen.



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally Posted by soficrow
Hmm. Think we need a quick history review here.
Back in 1989 or so, Russia went capitalist. The communist government was dismantled. Government assets like munitions were unprotected. Government-employed nuclear physicists lost their jobs.


Yes perhaps we do need a history review here soficrow, even though it is not part of the topic.

Let's see how Communist Russia became Capitalist all of a sudden, and let's find out what the leaders of Russia since then have been doing and have said about democracy in Russia.

I am not going to go over every detail of how since the 1900s every Russian communist leader and official proclaimed that they would conquer the world, including the U.S., and make us accept the Communist agenda by infiltrating groups in the west that would appeal the naive people in the west to accept their agenda of "world peace."

I will however post some of the most famous quotes by some of these Russian officials up to the present president in Russia.

Sometime in the 1920's Lenin said


First, we will take eastern Europe, then the masses of Asia, then we will encircle the United States which will be the last bastion of capitalism. We will not have to attack. It will fall into our hands like an overripe fruit..."


Excerpted from.
(The Death Of A Nation - John A. Stormer - 1978 .- Liberty Bell Press,. Florissant, Missouri - U.S.A - Page 14).




Communist Tactics, Manuilski: War between Communism and Capitalism: War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable, Today, of course, we are not strong enough to attack. Our time will come in 30 to 40 years. To win, we shall need the element of surprise. The western world will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There shall be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fist. [Dimitry Manuilski, Lenin School of Political Warfare, Moscow, 1930, Quoted in W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Communist, from a letter by Joseph Z. Kornfeder to Dr. J. D. Bales.]


Excerpted from.
freedomkeys.com...

In 1948 Stalin said during meetings of the Kremlin's Inner Circle.


Comrades, it is imperative that we create an entirely new type of fighting force... The objective of this [undercover] fighting force is to speed up the development of revolutionary situations... to bring about a breakdown of the capitalist system. This will lead to the revolutionary overthrow of governments, and the establishment of Soviet states."
"...As soon as they undertake the undercover subverter work, they will sever all contact with the Communist Party... and dedicate themselves to working for the Party by indirect methods. They will be called upon to join and operate within organizations and societies that are bourgeois and opposed to communism ... They will create the impression they are opposed to the ideology of communism.


In 1949 the World Peace Council was formed.


The World Peace Council (or World Council of Peace) was formed in 1949 in order to promote peaceful coexistence and nuclear disarmament. It has been alleged to be a front organization of Communist parties due to its advocacy of unilateral disarmament in western countries and the active participation and funding of the council by the Soviet bloc as well as the leading role taken in the WPC by Communists such as Frédéric Joliot-Curie, the WPC's founding president.

The WPC was especially active in those areas bordering U.S. military installations, in Western Europe, believed to house nuclear weapons. Following the breakup of the Soviet Union the council has dwindled down to a small core group.

It was involved in many demonstrations and protests from the late 1940s to the late 1980s and attempted to lead the peace movement though it was largely sidelined beginning in the 1960s by the New Left which distrusted the Soviet Union and its supporters in the "old left".


Excerpted from.
en.wikipedia.org...

Now let me jump to more recent events, because the list would grow too big to enumerate in this thread.

In June 1990, a whole year before the supposed "communist coup in Russia Mikhail Gorbachev stated.


I am now, just as I've always been, a convinced communist. It's useless and unproductive to deny the enormous and unique contribution of Marx, Engels and Lenin to the history of social thought and to modern civilization as a whole. They turned the idea of socialism into a real force for progress. They bear no responsibility for the distortions of that idea that occurred when it was put into practice. There were not only subjective, but also objective reasons for this.

To be a communist, as I see it, means to not be afraid of what is new, to reject obedience to any dogma, to think independently, to submit one's thoughts and plans of action to the test of morality and, through political action, to help working people realize their hopes and aspirations and live up to their abilities. I believe that to be a communist today means first of all to be consistently democratic and to put universal human values above everything else. It also means to be able to identify with the vital interests of the people and to understand the importance of the international and global issues that define mankind's common destiny.


Excerpted from. "Mikhail Gorbachev's interview with Time Magazine"
gorbachev.booknear.com...

How convinient that within a year he changed from being a convinced Communist to a capitalist.
Another similar quote of his is.


“I am a Communist, a convinced Communist! For some that may be a fantasy. But to me it is my main goal.”


Excerpted from.
en.thinkexist.com

So you think that he "suddenly" decided to shed his Communist dogma?

The perpetrators of the Communist coup in 1991 were supposedly jailed, but were later released, at least we know that one of them has been doing business with Iraq and was given a medal alongside some other Russian officials for helping Saddam's regime before the war started.

Back in the days if this coup was a real coup everyone of the perpetrators would have been executed, yet it appears that at least some of them have remained with some power and are still living freely in Russia...

Something of note is that every since Gorbachev was in power, every past president in Russia nominated the next president.

Now, let's see what president Putin has said about the old days.


"The collapse of the Soviet Union was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century," Putin said. "For the Russian people, it became a real drama. Tens of millions of our citizens and countrymen found themselves outside Russian territory. The epidemic of disintegration also spread to Russia itself."


Excerpted from.
www.rferl.org

Apart from this there are no independent news in Russia, they are owned by the government. Corporations are being attacked and assimilated once more to be part of the State, and the voting process for governors has been abolished by Putin, now only he and the Kremlin can name those who will be governors in Russia.


Originally Posted by soficrow
The arms were sold by entrepreneurs; most ended up in the middle East. Many unemployed Russian phsyicists found work in the middle East.

It's capitalism in action boys. Not a conspiracy, just good business.


Is that so soficrow? then why have big corporations been attacked by the Kremlin and even some, the biggest ones have been assimilated to be part of the state?

Why is there no independent media/tv channels in Russia anymore?

Why is it that pretty much everything that Russian defectors have been telling us has come true? from the fall of the Berlin wall to the dissolution of the Communist regime and every other point in between.

Why is it that these Russian defectors have told us exactly every step the Kremlin would take since the 1960s?

mod edit to use external quote code, please review this link
mod edit to shorten links
[edit on 14-1-2006 by Muaddib]



[edit on 22-7-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Oh, and btw, let's find out what some of the Communists these days are discussing, including giving lectures about the Communist agenda and the need for "the worker's revolution" or "worker's dictatorship."

Here is a link to a forum about their intentions and how they want to desguise some of their words, such as "dictatorship" so the "less informed" do not "become concerned", or as they say "let's talk to the workers as if they were 5 year old children."

www.revolutionaryleft.com...

Let me actually quote some of what they say...


ValkyrieSep 20 2002, 11:48 PM
Seriously, let's hope if it's a necessary by-product of abolishing Capitalism, that we can make the transition quick and clean and get on with the withering away of the state.

El Che, are you not agreeing with the Dictator of the Proletariat? i'd like to hear your views.




IepileiSep 22 2002, 06:55 AM
Well we must remember Marx was a person as well. To me, dictatorship of the proletariat is just a intimidating way of saying workers democracy.

Kinda like he said "the spectre of communism" that haunts europe and is trying to be exorcised by the people in power. It's intimidating to the upper-classes.

Sadly it's used against us because of it, cause people don't take the time to sit down and think it out - and those are just the few who have ACTUALLY read the manifesto.

It's misused. Kinda like the Lenin Quote:

"First we shall take Eastern Europe. Next the masses of Asia. Then we shall encircle the last bastion of capitalism, the United States of America. We shall not have to attack, it will fall like an over-ripe fruit into our hands."

If they actually knew how the system works and how things were going to spread, that quote wouldn't be nearly as intimidating as 1950s propaganda-whores made it seem.

(Edited by Iepilei at 7:44 am on Sep. 22, 2002)




TurnoviseousSep 22 2002, 09:22 PM
Yes, I think that we should use term workers´ democracy instead of dictatorship of proletariat when talking to someone who is new in Marxism.

We can tell him about the dictatorship of proletariat letter...


Communism is dead.....riiiight....



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Could the person who voted "no bias" tell me where in the initial post is there any bias?

The comments after the excerpts from the article is supposed to be the input from the poster on the story, so of course for some people there would be bias in that section, but to vote bias in an article, the bias has to be present in the first paragraph before the article's excerpt, which I am sure there is no bias.

[edit on 14-1-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 11:55 PM
link   
Muaddib I'm not sure what the point of all those old quotes was. The discussion of this topic seemed to be proceeding quite well on it's own.

Russia said a few months back they might back the U.S. move to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council, but they wanted time to try to avert the need for such action. The fact they tried to make money off the Iranians and to make some political gains in the process is largely unimportant in the overall scheme of things. Every other nation on earth would have done the same thing if it were possible.

I am not saying Russia is not still a serious threat to the West. They still clearly represent the most serious threat militarily; however, the chinese now represent a bigger economic threat. Relative to the situation in Iran though I do not believe the Russians have intentionally tried to manipulate the West into a debilitating conflict.



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astronomer68
Muaddib I'm not sure what the point of all those old quotes was. The discussion of this topic seemed to be proceeding quite well on it's own.


All those old quotes, and the new ones, are to show that this has been the plan of the Kremlin for a long time, and it is working. Iran might probably turn into another Iraq. The Russians, the Chinese and other countries which are now backing the U.S and Brittain will probably change their minds, once again.

When push comes to shove the U.S will probably see itself alone once more, with the exception of our few true allies, and then the Russians/Chinese/Germans/French will once more backstab the U.S. and proclaim to the world that "the U.S. has again taken the world to a war that was not necessary."

Am i jumping to conclusions? The article from Russia states that Russian officials know that Iran will go to war over this. I guess we would have to wait and see what happens.


Originally posted by Astronomer68
Russia said a few months back they might back the U.S. move to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council, but they wanted time to try to avert the need for such action. The fact they tried to make money off the Iranians and to make some political gains in the process is largely unimportant in the overall scheme of things. Every other nation on earth would have done the same thing if it were possible.



Russia has time and time again backstabbed us everytime they had/have a chance. They might claim to be our friends, but it is all a farce imo.


Originally posted by Astronomer68
I am not saying Russia is not still a serious threat to the West. They still clearly represent the most serious threat militarily; however, the chinese now represent a bigger economic threat. Relative to the situation in Iran though I do not believe the Russians have intentionally tried to manipulate the West into a debilitating conflict.


As you said, China is the biggest economical threat we have, they own most of our debt, Russia has the military machinery. The last pieces in the chess game have been laid out, my guess is that they are waiting for the right moment to strike.


[edit on 15-1-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 04:47 AM
link   
Hal, Russia is a bad guy for selling weapons to countries the United States is now fighting? Ok, then what does that make the US who sold Saddam his weapons in the 80's? What about the Taliban who got their weapons as hand-me-downs from the US funded Mujahedin? Does that make the US even more of a bad guy for selling weapons they then fight against 10 years or so later?

The xenophobia levels seem about right for the genesis of a new world war IMO. Iran may be facing sanctions but war will be even worse for Iran. Iran can still make a buck from their oil, with spiralling oil costs their will always be a buyer. I feel the only military action will come from the West. It will be designed to remove a thorn-in-the-side theocratic regime that is hostile to American interests. It will be to install a puppet regime with which to exploit the nation's sizeable oil wealth. We'll be sold some line about how its for our own good and the Iranians will be better off for it. There will be many people who will believe that.

[edit on 15/1/06 by subz]



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 06:08 AM
link   
I think Russians never wanted Iran to have the nukes. Some Iranian radicals helped fundamentalist in 1st Chechenya war, so it would be stupid to give Iran nukes or capabilty to make them. IMO they were just trying to make money (and enrich uranium in Russia), but when Teheran announced they will enrich uranium in Iran, Russians became uneasy and realised that the thing could turn agianst them in future.



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 06:21 AM
link   
Iran will drop the Dollar as it's oil currancy in a heart beat in favour of the Euro, that will hurt the US big time, (One conspiracy is that Saddam was planning to do the same thing before the invasion) if sanctions are impossed I'm sure China won't take any notice as Iran is Chinas biggest oil supplier. Any sanctions will cut this off, which China can't let happen. China for years has been buy up US currancy, any trouble and they'll dump it all on the open market causinging it to nose dive.



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Britman
China for years has been buy up US currancy, any trouble and they'll dump it all on the open market causinging it to nose dive.


While that certainly is a possibility you have to keep in mind if they did dump it, that could have grave implications on their own economy. All the US would have to do is drop their favored nation status and presto their biggest market for exports would be gone.



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by subz
Hal, Russia is a bad guy for selling weapons to countries the United States is now fighting? Ok, then what does that make the US who sold Saddam his weapons in the 80's?

That makes the US a responsible nation that cleans up its own mess unlike Russia starting fires across the world and watching them burn!!
If Russia would actually exert itself and make an assertive stand for setting things right then it would be responsible rather than just be a weapon vendor.
If they hadnt pawned off every thing they had for cheap then their might be some sense of balance

The AK-47 has killed more people than any other plauge, war, weapon etc in the history of mankind !!




top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join