It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Biliverdin
Originally posted by xuenchen
The world bank may have done that for a reason.
The contractors needed to be from other countries.
and maybe Iran did not want to commit to a "large" enough load.
Well, the reason that the World Bank gave was that Iran was subsidising it's citizens electricity supply. As Iran stated, if they didn't do that, large groups of the population would not be able to afford electricity (at that time). The World Bank said they had to stop subsidising or they wouldn't loan. Iran said they could not be discriminate in that way against their people.
Originally posted by CottonwoodStormy
reply to post by Biliverdin
Yes it was. Just to note, I just saw on press tv here, the response from iran to this very subject about Tehran's ambitions to attack inside US , Iran says this is DELUSIONAL.
1967: Under the US "Atoms for Peace" program, started in the 1950s by president Dwight D Eisenhower, the shah is allowed to buy a five-megawatt, light-water type research reactor for Tehran (which - call it irony - is still playing a role in the dispute over the Iranian nuclear program).
The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program. The participation of the United States and Western European governments in Iran's nuclear program continued until the 1979 Iranian Revolution that toppled the Shah of Iran.
I don't think a theocracy is ever a good idea, but, it is moderated by the presidency and they do have the interests of their citizenry very much at heart.
On February 11, 1979, the pro-Western Iranian constitutional monarchy was overthrown and the nation became the Islamic Republic of Iran, ruled by a non-elected religious Supreme Leader who is addressed as "Ayatollah." The population of Iran falls just under 70 million, with an average annual income equivalent to approximately US$8,000.
Protesters took to the streets on June 19th, 2009, and were treated brutally by the Basij (paramilitary police). As many as 150 people have died, journalists have been expelled, and a human rights crisis--and possible revolution--is underway. The situation is ongoing.
Very few systems can be described as ideal, but all things considered, geo-politically, it is what works, and internally, they seem to be working towards the right track and are not, to my eye, a beligerent people.
Free speech, as such, does not exist in Iran. Human rights activists and other perceived agitators are sometimes subject to beatings, arrests, torture, and disappearance.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a religious institution with no secular concept of law. Those who convert from Islam to another faith may face execution for apostasy. Religious minorities are routinely subject to widespread persecution.
In Iran, women can vote and run for Parliament and are not prohibited from traveling freely, but they are also subject to police beatings and torture for violating perceived social norms, are not protected from domestic violence, and are discriminated against in other subtle ways (such as inheritance law).
Arabs (who make up 3%) of the population, Azeris (who make up 24%), and Kurds (who make up 7%) are frequently subject to racial profiling and mass arrests at cultural functions. Although there are very few Jews in Iran, vicious antisemitism is also a serious problem.
And? I think Iran is right to want nuclear weapons. The middle east is very tumultuous right now and nuclear weapons would make the situation much safer for them and their people. They have a right to nuclear weapons and this doesn't change my opinion on the situation in the middle east at all.
The UN Security Council has passed seven resolutions on Iran:
•Resolution 1696 (31 July 2006) demanded that Iran suspend its uranium enrichment activities, invoking Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter to make that demand legally binding on Iran.
•Resolution 1737 (23 December 2006) imposed sanctions after Iran refused to suspend its enrichment activities, cutting off nuclear cooperation, demanding that Iran cooperate with the IAEA, and freezing the assets of a number of persons and organizations linked to Iran's nuclear and missile programs. It established a committee to monitor sanctions implementation.
•Resolution 1747 (24 March 2007) expanded the list of sanctioned Iranian entities and welcomed the proposal by the permanent five members of the Security Council plus Germany for resolving issues regarding Iran's nuclear program.
•In resolution 1803 (3 March 2008), the Council decided to extend those sanctions to additional persons and entities, impose travel restrictions on sanctioned persons, and bar exports of nuclear- and missile-related dual-use goods to Iran.
•Resolution 1835 (27 September 2008) reaffirmed the preceding four resolutions, the only one of the seven not to invoke Chapter VII.
•Resolution 1929 (9 June 2010) imposed a complete arms embargo on Iran, banned Iran from any activities related to ballistic missiles, authorized the inspection and seizure of shipments violating these restrictions, and extended the asset freeze to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL). The resolution passed by a vote of 12–2, with Turkey and Brazil voting against and Lebanon abstaining. A number of countries imposed measures to implement and extend these sanctions, including the United States, the European Union, Australia, Canada, Japan, Norway,South Korea, and Russia.
•Resolution 1984 (8 June 2011) extended for a further 12 months the mandate of the Panel of Experts established by Resolution 1929.
Originally posted by seabag
"Such sanctions will benefit us. They will make us more self-reliant ... We would not achieve military progress if sanctions were not imposed on Iran's military sector ... More imposed pressures mean more self-reliance for Iran. Sanctions are beneficial also because it makes us more determined not to change our nuclear course ... Iran will not change its nuclear course because of sanctions...,"he added.
Sanctions against Iran's military sector??? That sounded to me like he’s admitting Iran’s nuclear program is for military purposes. What country’s military runs its nuclear program for public energy production??
I’m wondering when some of you “smart” people sticking to your guns on Iran will finally connect the dots??
edit on 3-2-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)
Elsewhere in his statements, Ayatollah Khamenei described the present century as the century of Islam and said that the Egyptian uprising has influenced the youth and intellectuals of Washington, London, Madrid, Rome and Athens.
He stressed: “This is the century of Islam and the era of the people and in the future, it will influence the destiny of the entire humanity.”
Ayatollah Khamenei stressed: “Whenever we are involved, we explicitly declare it. We were involved in the anti-Israel events, which resulted in victories in the 33-day and 22-day wars. And from now on, wherever a nation or a group fights and confronts the Zionist regime, we will support and help it, and we are not at all afraid of saying this.”