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 Says Western Incentives Over Nuclear Dispute "Acceptable"

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Iran has announced that it views Western incentives "acceptable" and that they are a basis for further talks. US Secretary of State Rice suggested Iran talks to the negotiators directly saying "If the Iranians want to respond positively, I would hope that they would do so through the channel that is established between the six and the government of Iran, and that is Mr. Solana,".
 



news.yahoo.com
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran said Sunday that Western incentives to halt its nuclear program were an "acceptable basis" for talks, and it is ready for detailed negotiations.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice responded that Iran should talk directly to negotiators if it wants to discuss the six-nation proposal.

Frustrated world powers agreed Wednesday to send Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible punishment, saying Tehran had given no sign it would bargain in earnest over its nuclear ambitions.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


An interesting development. A case of good cop, bad cop perhaps?

If Iran decides to be amiable regarding its nuclear program as this announcement suggests it could create a contrast in the Middle East.

One nation is settling its confrontations via diplomacy, whilst others repeatedly use force. Some pretty good timing here.




posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   

One nation is settling its confrontations via diplomacy, whilst others repeatedly use force. Some pretty good timing here.


.... There is a bit of difference between what is happening in Israel and Iran..... if that is what you are trying to hint at....
Iran hasn't been repeatedly attacked while Israel has... Nice try to use this to blame Israel, or whatever other country you are trying to blame....



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Hey Ill use this as an excuse to blame Israel why not. ISRAEL learn how to use diplomacy!! Stop fighting you darned warmongerers!! Next I will hear Israel is bombing Syria to the past because one of their citizens did not stop at a red light in Jerusalem.

Good for Iran, I still say they have a right to develop nuke weapons.


apc

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Sure... the Isrealis are a bunch of arrogant a-holes. BUT, they didnt start the current fight. And yes, I know this is getting old, but they do have the right to defend themselves.

I strongly suspect this change from Iran is just another chess move. A bit of protection for when they take a stronger stance against Israel (if they haven't already as is rumored).

>
Iran has a right to nukes?! Well... then I guess they also have a right to biological and chemical weapons as well. It's not like we have to worry about them giving them to any extremists who would use them against us. Nah... couldn't happen.

[edit on 16-7-2006 by apc]



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Why did we have to wait this long for an answer?
What has changed?
Why has he all of a sudden decided to tell us NOW.. and not in mid august when he ORIGINALLY declared?

Why do you enflame the world over a simple answer, a week after they demanded the answer, yet a month BEFORE You stated your offer it up?

Iran have the bomb.
Israel have lit the fuse.
Now america is going to be taken along wether it likes it or not!



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 11:44 PM
link   
This is no answer; it is just simply more of the same.

I agree with Kosachev’s statement in the article posted:


"On the one hand we must hail any readiness by Tehran at least to discuss the proposals of the six nations," he told The Associated Press. "Unfortunately, we have already witnessed such signals in the past, which then were not followed up."

He suspected Iran of "dragging its feet" to avoid unnecessary concessions.

When there is an official statement by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in acceptance, perhaps there will be something (or not).

Ahmadinejad, stated earlier in the week Iran will not negotiate, then later stated Iran will not negotiate in their ‘undeniable rights’…Abdolreza Rahmani-Fazli in a report earlier this week said Iran had already turned down the proposal…Hamid Reza Asefi is today saying the proposals are an acceptable basis for more talks!. What a stall game!...

Originally posted by subz
One nation is settling its confrontations via diplomacy, whilst others repeatedly use force. Some pretty good timing here.

Well, one of the puppeteers showed their hand….


supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Hezbollah was winning its fight against Israel and would not disarm.
AP Source



mg



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Agit8DChop:

>Why has he all of a sudden decided to tell us NOW.. and not in mid august when he ORIGINALLY declared?

It's all about face and not being seen as being "forced" to do something.

I can understand where they are coming from.

Cheers

JS



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:25 AM
link   
Well I think that the government of Iran is trying to use there nuclear program to exact econmic aid from Europen nations and the USA. If the government of Iran sole goal was to obtain nuclear weapons they wouldnt bother with negotiations.

In time Iran will settle for a political settlement that is untill the next time they want to blackmail other countries into giving them more econmic aid.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
Well I think that the government of Iran is trying to use there nuclear program to exact econmic aid from Europen nations and the USA. If the government of Iran sole goal was to obtain nuclear weapons they wouldnt bother with negotiations.

In time Iran will settle for a political settlement that is untill the next time they want to blackmail other countries into giving them more econmic aid.


The Iranian regime "has to bother with negotiations" because they know there will be immediate sanctions if they do not want to negotiate. As mg already said, this is a stalling game for them. They are trying to hold on as long as possible. The Iranian regime has been lying for decades, remember that when they had declared to the world that they did not have a nuclear program it was found out after years of their lies that for nearly 20 years they had a hidden nuclear program, and this was only found out when Iranian dissidents gave evidence of these programs.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   
I think I said this before, but why don't we just let them drop out of the UN, and create their own global represntative group with North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria, and whoever else so chooses. By doing this we can exile the nations we are constantly having problems with from our global community, without having to cause war for any reason. By allowing them their own community, they can then survive and prosper, so long as they do not support, cause, interfere with, or bring harm upon our community. Obviously if they had access to global resources that our community restricts from them by trading exclusively their citizens would be better off as a society.

Many may declare that these are horrible nations with atrocious human rights records, however none of our restrictions upon their people have been accomplishing anything for our community or theirs. Forcing war onto innocent citizens of nations for breaches of these restrictions has accomplished nothing for either side in the past, is not benefeting people at present, nor will it accomplish anything in the future.

By allowing them to simply trade amongst themselves away from our rules, they may very well indeed prosper and perhaps form the basis of a new civilization for the future. They would continue to be seperated from us if we so wish to continue isolating them from our community, but at least their innocent citizens will be allowed to prosper.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
whats new, what does this matter to anything. we saw in iraq, how these countries can mess you around for a long time.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by DYepes
By allowing them to simply trade amongst themselves away from our rules, they may very well indeed prosper and perhaps form the basis of a new civilization for the future. They would continue to be seperated from us if we so wish to continue isolating them from our community, but at least their innocent citizens will be allowed to prosper.


I think you missed the point big time. Why do you NEED thermonuclear weapons to trade peacefully with other Islamo-Fascist or Socialist Comrades? That is the problem with Iran, they export money and weapons to Internationally recognized terrorist organizations, they DON'T WANT to be isolated, but they do want to have proxy fighters and nukes for detterent reasons when they get caught.

It's far too niave to believe that some of these nations like Iran will just keep to themselves if they aren't part of the UN. Not that they want out in the first place.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   
they want nukes to avoid being illegally and unjustfiablly occupied by a foreign power, as you can see by history in the making the last hald decade.

Seriously what do you believe that the whole nation of Israel wants nothing mroe than to get the bomb and begin attacking the world and destroying Israel, ensuring their own destruction? NOW THAT is naive thinking.

Nuclear weapons were developed as a means to destroy convoys of tanks and any naval forces approaching your land if you felt it would save the most for your own country. Of course the only nation to have ever used them offensivley on a civilian population was America during the birth of the bomb, but why would that have anything to do with anything?

Let them have thier bomb and isolate them from OUR world while they merge their own. The world needs change, and quite often mind you, otherwise we will never stop fighting.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Someone asked what had changed to prompt this latest Iranian response and I think the answer to that question is the stated agreement with the West by the Chinese and Russians regarding some sort of sanctions against Iran.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   
no i meant they can just give into these things and carry on what they are doing. it does not make them stop there hunt for those weapons.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by DYepes
I think I said this before, but why don't we just let them drop out of the UN, and create their own global represntative group with North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria, and whoever else so chooses.


Keep you friends close, keep your enemies closer.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by DYepes
they want nukes to avoid being illegally and unjustfiablly occupied by a foreign power, as you can see by history in the making the last hald decade.


And maybe they'll do something to give the world a reason to attack them,.... but, of course when Iran has nukes to defend itself against the rest of the world, the world is screwed. I think we know well what Muslim extremists are capable of doing,.... including sacrificing their own lives willingly to wipe out their enemy.



Nuclear weapons were developed as a means to destroy convoys of tanks and any naval forces approaching your land if you felt it would save the most for your own country.


Just because something is designed for a certain purpose does not always mean that it will be used for that purpose. Nuclear weapons can be used for many different reasons.



Let them have thier bomb and isolate them from OUR world while they merge their own. The world needs change, and quite often mind you, otherwise we will never stop fighting.


If we isolate them from OUR world, we won't be able to keep good track of what they're doing behind closed doors. Retaining some form of connection to their world is the only way to keep an eye on them. Like I said,....Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer.



[edit on 17-7-2006 by 2manyquestions]


apc

posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:09 PM
link   

DYepes
Nuclear weapons were developed as a means to destroy convoys of tanks and any naval forces approaching your land if you felt it would save the most for your own country.


uhhhhhh.... no.

Nukes were developed to destroy military bases and cities. Cities, not because they are population centers, but because they contain government offices. If your targeting systems aren't that great, and you can't reliable hit a single building in a city, then you simply take out the entire city.

It amazes me that you think a 'live and let live' policy is a good idea. I have very little concern about Iran or NK officially launching any nuclear strikes. The problem is that the weapons will, intentionally or not (although likely the former), fall into the wrong hands. The hands of those who have no problem dying in a ball of fire along with a few million innocents. The glory of martyrdom.

[edit on 17-7-2006 by apc]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:30 PM
link   
A little off topic but just to remind all that the Islamic calendar anniversary of the 9/11 attacks (23 Jumaada al Thani) falls on July 19, 2006.

Maybe now is a good time to take a good look at who Iran is friendly with. I think most people in the "West" are a little more concerned with whom the Iranians will supply nukes to than whether they will take out Israel. Sorry if you're Israeli, but that's probably true.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   
The terrorists will mostly go away if we let them mind their business while we mind ours. As long as your continously dictating what they should do they are never going to like anyone. We figured it out ourselves, they have all the information we learned, now lets let them figure it out.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join