Ahmadinejad says no need for nuclear weapons

Nope, I've read all that. See my previous post.

US Policy here (and elsewhere) has been to back the other party in a corner. They either completely submit or get aggressive - and that's where the US has them.

Originally posted by SteveR
Nope, I've read all that. See my previous post.

US Policy here (and elsewhere) has been to back the other party in a corner. They either completely submit or get aggressive - and that's where the US has them.

Well since the IAEA tells the U.S. that their version of the report is wrong. This version tells that the IAEA wants more information which Iran has yet to meet all of those requests. The U.S. is not the one writing this report.

What do you think is going to happen, ultimately?

Iran is already softening their stance on the nuclear standoff.

This started with Ahmadinejad last week. Now the nuts and bolts workers of diplomacy are echoing...

read here

Originally posted by SteveR

Originally posted by deltaboy
If its peaceful, why are many of the facilities in underground hardened areas built to withstand any possible airstrikes. Sounds more like preventing anybody from interfering their objective which is the bomb.

Maybe because the US is dominating all sides of their border? And has already decimated two Middle Eastern countries? I don't blame them for taking precautions.

haha funny word dominating,more like stuck and they dont know what to do

Originally posted by kozmo
No Negotiating...

with regimes that support and fund terrorism! Good GOD people! Where have you been for the past 5 years!? yeah, let's take this LIAR for his word - just like he has denied funding Hammas and Hezbollah or arming Hezbollah during the last conflict with Israel!? Come on! DENY IGNORANCE!!! To put faith into ANYTHING this man is saying is folly to say the least.

Where have you been for the last 60 years?

C"mon, it seems you need to deny ignorance my friend. The world is Seldom in
Black and white, more massive shades of grey. Support and fund terrorism? and you think Iran has got a monopoly on that? Most Western countries have track records of supporting Terrorists one way or another, especially the U.S.

Do some research and you'll find that it's not so simple as a Dubya Speech

The United States has liberated more people and contributed more aid than any other nation in the world, yet WE are the bad guys?

Your right. The U.S has don e lots of good. It has done equally as much bad, and in the M.E right now, its track record is terrible.

[edit on 12/06/2005 by kojac]

[edit on 12/06/2005 by kojac]

The Us has never supported to direct infliction of pain and suffering on a civilian population. Yes, we supported binladen at a point in history, but not to commmit terrorist acct but to fight against the russian invasion.
I also think iraq is working relatively well. WE (the US) can not just run in and out of the "evil" ciuntries snatching up the people we think are terrorist. Want we needed to do and have now done is create a battle ground for the terrorist to come to us.
IT is sad that some people have to die to save the lives of many but that is just the way it is. There is no peace in this war. You cannot make peace with people whos mission is to kill you and every one of your commrads. What would the negotiation be like?
US: okay, well stop bombing you if you stop killing us.
Terrorist: no we want u all to die
US: okay, well.... we will kill one million of our people if we make peace.
Terrorist:no we want you all to die.
US: hmm. ok well give you all the republicans and you can do wat u please with em
Terroristkay, but the rest must die too.

I mean cum on, when it comes to the intentional slaying of civilians, there is only black and white, only it is good and evil