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.

 

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejects talks with USA. Duck and cover Iran…

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Iran’s supreme leader basically has just told the west to bomb them. The message this refusal to talk implies is that talks and diplomacy with the west is not in their interests, i.e. they only want confrontation and war.

The world has bent over backwards for Iran, even offered them all the ability and equipment they need to make energy from nuclear reactors, their stated goal by the way. But every offer from every nation has been ultimately shot down. And now, they aren’t even willing to talk anymore.

If anybody here is not yet convinced Iran is hell bent on making nuclear weapons for offensive attacks I don’t know what else they need to do to convince you other than launching them.

And with that attitude, I say we let them have their way…If they don’t want to talk, no problem. Actions speak louder than words anyways…

Drudge



Iran's supreme leader rejects nuclear talks with the US, saying not beneficial
Tue Jun 27 2006 09:25:10 ET

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has rejected the prospect of talks with the United States on the nuclear program, saying nothing would be gained, state television reported Tuesday.

"Negotiations with the United States would have no benefit for us, and we do not need them," the television quoted Khamenei as telling Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade.

Developing...


World War Three here we come




posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Wow strong propaganda you got going there skippy.

First of all the west signed an agreement with Iran allowing Iran to enrich uranium and have a complete fuel cycle and the west has now denied Iran it's right under the NPT.

Secondly the talks will lead nowhere, we all know America and what it is like there attitude can be summed up on once sentence :

"it's either our way or no way"

America would just try to keep on pressing Iran to abandon its fuel cycle and then would act as if Iran was to blame for nothing coming out of the talks.

Also the world has not bent over for Iran, In fact it's the other way around it's the Iranians that have bent over for the world and have danced around like circus animals for the world.

They put a stop to enrichment for 2 years voluntarily even though they didn't have too. They allowed random inspections into facilities that they didn't have to under any agreements that they have signed. They allowed inspections of the military facilities which was not required under any agreement. They allowed cameras(CCTV) with 24/7 monitoring of there nuclear facilities which was also not required. Yet you act as if they are the ones being done a favor.

As far as I'm concerned I'm happy with Iran's behavior and support them fully up to now.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:22 AM
link   
As most if not all threads by skippy, this one is meant not to inform, but to inflame. Even down to the title of the thread - "duck and cover Iran". And the trademark "bring them on" attitude, which in my opinion is typical of an unsophisticated person.


[edit on 27-6-2006 by Aelita]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
As most if not all threads by skippy, this one is meant not to inform, but to inflame. Even down to the title of the thread - "duck and cover Iran". And the trademark "bring them on" attitude, which is in my opinion is typical of an unsophisticated person.


And in ALL of Aelita's posts and replies, all she does is attack the poster and never actually posts on the topic, let alone add any meaningful information.

And in my opinion, that’s typical of a person of much hate who is easy to offer un-constructive criticism, as they do not have the intelligence or aptitude to offer any insight or content of their own.

But that’s just my opinion.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:30 AM
link   
World war III you say? I'd love to see Bush try and draft young America to go and fight in the Middle East. There's not enough HOTELS in the US let alone prisons to hold the sheer amount of people who would refuse to go and fight in this sham of an oil crusade.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjcAnd in my opinion, that’s typical of a person of much hate


OK, skippy, I'm all ears. What is it that I hate?

I mean, everybody knows you hate Arabs, for one. I don't.


[edit on 27-6-2006 by Aelita]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx
As far as I'm concerned I'm happy with Iran's behavior and support them fully up to now.


Wow...just wow




"There is no doubt that the new wave of attacks in Palestine will wipe off this stigma from the face of the Islamic world," he said. "Anybody who recognises Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nations' fury [and] is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world."




'Israel must be wiped off the map'




"The wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world."




“Iran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to the Islamic countries due to their need.”


You support this sort of behavior? Why?



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita

Originally posted by skippytjcAnd in my opinion, that’s typical of a person of much hate


OK, skippy, I'm all ears. What is it that I hate?

I mean, everybody knows you hate Arabs, for one. I don't.


[edit on 27-6-2006 by Aelita]


Back it up, post one comment from any thread I have ever made that states I hate Arabs.

I am waiting, until then you and your opinions are meaningless.


EDIT:

You know what Aelita? Forget it, dony worry about it. I have decided you are irrelivant as you add no content but hate and spite to threads. You are now ignored, so go nuts.

[edit on 27-6-2006 by skippytjc]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:39 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx
Also the world has not bent over for Iran, In fact it's the other way around it's the Iranians that have bent over for the world and have danced around like circus animals for the world.


I disagree. The world continues to allow their financial support of terrorism, the US for example has continued to ignore Iran's active role in the Kholar Tower bombings, the world has been patient with Iran in its desire to develop nuclear technology while developing ballistic missile technology at the same time. The US has continued to ignore Iran's active role in causing problems in Iraq.

What price has Iran paid? Not being able to do business with the US? That is how free market society works, the US or any country for that matter should have the right to choose whether or not to do business with dishonest people. The US refuses to do business with North Korea and Iran, due to their dishonest behavior, yet that makes the US the bad guy in your judgement?

I'm sorry, but in my opinion you have become very selective using questionable judgment regarding what responsible behavior is for countries in the world, and by Iran pursuing nuclear technology while also pursuing ballistic missile technology while at the same time talking openly about killing people based on race or religious beliefs AND justifying such behavior as a religious right... well I'd say that is not responsible behavior and doesn't deserve the moral equivalence you give Iran compared to the responsible nations of the world.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   
*SNIP*

On topic:

Iran has joined and quit various "talks" a few times already. This in itself is not news.


[edit on 27-6-2006 by Aelita]

Mod Edit: On Topic, Or Not At All.

[edit on 27/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   
There will not be an invasion of Iran, at the Builderberg meeting recently in Canada the consciences was that they did not support the Bush Criminal Cabals plan for invasion. The Builderberg's want oil to stay in the 70$ US/D price range for now and near future, Not 100$+. So there will be no support from the Coalition of the Willing, and if Bush does move forward like his Israeli masters want, it will be the US and Israel against Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, backed by Russia and China and who ever else that can turn a profit against the Bush Terrorists.
Not to mention the US will need the draft.
So it ain't gonna happen.





[edit on 27/6/2006 by Sauron]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Well, the Iranians think they r fully supported by Russia and China.

This has inboldened them to not cooperate with anyone.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
Well, the Iranians think they r fully supported by Russia and China.

This has inboldened them to not cooperate with anyone.



I agree, but they also shot down Russia and China's offers too, and although they dont condone action against Iran, there is no way they will actively engage against the west if they choose to attack.

So I have no Idea what Iran is banking on.

[edit on 27-6-2006 by skippytjc]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 10:47 AM
link   
In as much as I realize that we have fellow Americans who would enjoy the thought of more bloodshed of innocent civilians as well as the blood of our brave children who will inevitably be the ones to go off and fight in these wars to please them, the Iranian nuclear situation will continue to be a diplomatic issue. It will not escalate into the apocolyptic war that so many fanatics of the right would envision it to be at all. This administration, as foolish as it has been, will not overstretch its capabilities and expose our men/women currently fighting in Iraq to satisfy the minority of americans paranoia. The majority of Americans will want to see infallible proof this time before commiting to any war again. They will wait to see the results of the IAEA and continue on a diplomatic tract if anything is deemed questionable.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
The majority of Americans will want to see infallible proof this time before commiting to any war again. They will wait to see the results of the IAEA and continue on a diplomatic tract if anything is deemed questionable.


I hope so, because war doesn't need to be the answer for Iran, although the constant discussion regarding the possibility seems to dominate. It is almost as if people have forgotten how to handle problems without hte use of violence.

I don't think Iran wants war, they want the power the absence of war provides them over the Arab world. When the shooting starts, all the propaganda goes out the window and Iran likely gets beat up by just about anyone.

It is recognized in strategic studies circles that Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, and Israel are militarily more powerful than Iran, but that isn't how things are expressed in the perceptions of the average joe earthling.

Iran's power is only evident as long as their is no shooting, because when the shooting starts, Iran isn't built to stop a military based butt-whoopin, particularly from the air.

Just because the US can crush Iran militarily doesn't mean the US should. It serves no purpose if stability and peace in the region remains a major goal of the Iraq war. Iraq has already led to elections in UAE and Kuwait, a change in attitude regarding freedom, open government, and democracy on the Arab street, and rights for women has become a major offshoot of the Iraq war.

These social changes take time to develop and take hold, and moving towards a militant resolution against Iran would only negate the positives that are taking place in the Middle East.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 11:07 AM
link   
And lets not forget the following HEAD-Lines:

Iran Is Judged 10 Years From Nuclear Bomb
U.S. Intelligence Review Contrasts With Administration Statements

Iran bomb 'within next 10 years'
Iran is determined to have a nuclear weapon and could possess one within 10 years, according to the top US intelligence chief.

Analysts Say a Nuclear Iran Is Years Away
Western nuclear analysts said yesterday that Tehran lacked the skills, materials and equipment to make good on its immediate nuclear ambitions, even as a senior Iranian official said Iran would defy international pressure and rapidly expand its ability to enrich uranium for fuel.

Mod Note: WOT Posting Conduct – Please Review Link.

[edit on 27/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by darksided
These social changes take time to develop and take hold, and moving towards a militant resolution against Iran would only negate the positives that are taking place in the Middle East.

Darksided,
In all honesty, had Israel not been one of the main protestors and had GWB not implicated Israel in being one of the reasons behind his protests, I would probably bet that we would have had an easier time with all this. The Pakistani and India agreements with GWB also didn't help matters much as well. You have 1 country that more then likely has illegal WMD's making threats, and then on top of that you have Pakistan and India basically getting the OK from GWB to continue with their WMD programs as well, and meanwhile we have no real proof that Iran is even leaning towards weaponization. We should be taking the same stance with ANY country that has aquired WMD's illegally wether or not they are our enemy or ally.

Pie



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by bramski
World war III you say? I'd love to see Bush try and draft young America to go and fight in the Middle East. There's not enough HOTELS in the US let alone prisons to hold the sheer amount of people who would refuse to go and fight in this sham of an oil crusade.


Invasion is not required to destroy and demorilize your enemy.

Right or wrong the US has the weaponry to detroy Iran's infrastructure, power systems, military, agriculture and civilization without one US Soldier ever entering the country. They can even do so with a minimum of civilian casualties.

The US does not need to invade Iran to reduce Iran to nothing more than a cave man society that would last for decades. Leaving Iran nothing more than a pitance of what it is today.

Im not saying this should or needs to be done but its a fact that it could be done in less than a few short weeks of attacks.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:28 PM
link   
There are some things to consider when picking on poor mis-understood Iran.

Iran declared war on the US in the late 70's when it abducted US citizens. It continued that war with the funding of the group that bombed the Marines in Beruit. It continues to fund groups that murder women and children. Iran sends troops and material into Iraq to kill Iraqis and US troops.

Maybe we should be a little more understanding with Iran, a little nicer, more flexible. If the US would stop being such a big ol' meany head, Iran wouldn't be forced to murder citizens of other countries, nor torture and murder its own citizens.

I admire the Persian culture and people. But a theocracy is BAD. Period. I'll say the same thing if Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwel comes to power in the US. It is the Iranian citizens that I feel bad for. They are the ones who will suffer for the mullahs; the ones who made a fountain that flowed red to remember the children they sent to die, weaponless against Iraqi troops in the 80's.





top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join