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: U.S. Slams Door Shut on Nuke Talks With Iran

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:14 PM
link   
here is a major difference in dealing with Iran than with dealing with North Korea.

North Korea is defencive, Iran as a Shiite majority ran nation is 100% Muslim... and I do not need to remind you that there is a growing division between the muslim or Islamic world and western or christan world do I?

If at any point in the future action is taken against Iran either by Israel or the U.S.A. (at this point that seems inevitable) we will have confirmed ourselves to the muslim world as the "great evil"... There is Islamic thinking that will motivate even to the point of suicidal war which could lead the Iranians to fight to the end.... the ultimate end... Have we forgotten that Iran is for the most part governed by the The sheikhs and ayatollahs?

Can we contine to ignore or be oblivous to the fact that we now live in a world divided by Islamic and western and christian values or cultures?

Islam has in the past had a goal of world domination, and yet again may have that very same goal... Radical islamists will stive to reach that very goal when they are confronted with threats from what they see as the infidels or great evil.

One member here at ATS created a post not so long ago and if you missed it you can see it here: www.terroranalysis.com...

We are in a time where humanity will face doom or find a path to peace and that is now in the hands or those who have power over our respective governments.

We will either meet them in battle or through diplomacy... But they will not be ignored.

It is the legacy of complacency that has brought us to this ultimate point, we cannot underestimate this enemy for even one day more, for with each day we grow more divided and ready for the war of all wars.

Gazz

[edit on 18-11-2004 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:15 PM
link   
North Korea is not the threat that Iran is, plus the Chinese will keep the North Koreans under wrap, they have to....



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz

We will either meet them in battle or through diplomacy... But they will not be ignored.

It is the legacy of complacency that has brought us to this ultimate point, we cannot underestimate this enemy for even one day more, for with each day we grow more divided and ready for the war of all wars.

Gazz



I ahve to say that I totally agree with you...

I ahve been saying for a while that the war is either now or later. Now we have a considerable edge...later when they are nuclear armed?



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:23 PM
link   
I will not relay on China too much, they will turn against anybody when it comes with their increasing need for oil in their future.

And by the way edsinger they oil in Iraq is a long term deal not short term. And is to benefit the big oil companies that are the ones that are going to pump it and refined it.

It has been in the table of our present administration since day one of the Iraqi war.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I will not relay on China too much, they will turn against anybody when it comes with their increasing need for oil in their future.

And by the way edsinger they oil in Iraq is a long term deal not short term. And is to benefit the big oil companies that are the ones that are going to pump it and refined it.

It has been in the table of our present administration since day one of the Iraqi war.


Tell me why then if its long term are we so hard working towards alternative fuels including the highest amount ever funded to this given by the BUSH administration?



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita

That's a ridiculous assumption. They will keep it till the very end when other options staving off the invasion are exhausted.

Care to provide a link or a Kim's quote where he says he will bomb us of the money doesn't come?


First, your own assumption is even more ridiculous, unless you are in the government of Iran's circle and you know exactly what they will do....so are you part of this circle?...

Second...other Islamic extremists threatened to attack the U.S.....did it not happen when they were able to attack us?.... So, whose statement is more ridiculous?...

About NK... the recent history of NK and the responses from Kim, it is him who runs the country... speak more than one statement...btw, I also think that Kim is crazy enough to one day use a nuclear weapon... Perhaps you are willing to allow a crazed man to keep making threats...there wouldn't be any problem if that crazed man did not have nukes...

In the 1994 agreement Kim agreed to stop his nuclear weapons program in exchange the United States, Japan, and South Korea agreed to give nuclear fuel and build two power plants.

Kim broke the agreement by saying the U.S. was the first one to break the agreement because it was taking too long to build the power plants, so Kim resumed NK nuclear weapons program. AS a response the U.S., i believe in 2002, halted all oil shipments to NK.

Here is a link to the 1994 agreement.
www.ceip.org...


Perhaps Kim won't use a nuclear weapon, which I doubt since he has made tests over Japan, and possibly made another test when it was reported that a mushroom cloud was seen in some recluded site in NK.

But the problem is that even if Kim does not use a nuclear weapon, he is likely to sell them to whoever has the money....so terrorists could get nuclear weapons from Kim.


[edit on 18-11-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by UM_Gazz

We will either meet them in battle or through diplomacy... But they will not be ignored.

It is the legacy of complacency that has brought us to this ultimate point, we cannot underestimate this enemy for even one day more, for with each day we grow more divided and ready for the war of all wars.

Gazz



I ahve to say that I totally agree with you...



OMG.. now this has really thrown me... edsinger agrees with me?

Yikes... The end of the world must be much closer than I suspected.


Back to the topic at hand.. In my opinion of course.. I believe it is a mistake to shut the door on diplomacy with Iran.. I would hope that the Bush administration would be open to talks with the Iranians ... To think otherwise is just asking for conflict.

We always have the hope for peace.. Though that may be all we have here it is at least a positive thing.

Gazz



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Edsinger Pakistan does not have a stable government also, and India neither but both of those countries also had nuclear weapons, and US has done nothing to stop their development.

Just a reminder, for some reason even NK is not priority but is so convinient to want Iran. Don't you smell the foul play.


Iran is more of a problem because they have a radical islamic government Marg... Kim is dangerous also, but Iran is 10 times more dangerous because of their government's intentions.

Peace talks with NK are more likely than with Iran.

[edit on 18-11-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz

Back to the topic at hand.. In my opinion of course.. I believe it is a mistake to shut the door on diplomacy with Iran.. I would hope that the Bush administration would be open to talks with the Iranians ... To think otherwise is just asking for conflict.

We always have the hope for peace.. Though that may be all we have here it is at least a positive thing.

Gazz


Gazz, the problem is, Iran has proven they dont want to talk...they are willing to do anything necessary to acquire nuclear weapons...what do you do when a country is not willing to stop their nuclear programs and do not want to talk?...



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Gazz, the problem is, Iran has proven they dont want to talk...they are willing to do anything necessary to acquire nuclear weapons...what do you do when a country is not willing to stop their nuclear programs and do not want to talk?...



It is time to play hard ball and tell the UN to get &*^%(.

IMHO



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Gazz, the problem is, Iran has proven they dont want to talk...they are willing to do anything necessary to acquire nuclear weapons...what do you do when a country is not willing to stop their nuclear programs and do not want to talk?...


Ok.. I will answer with a question... How did any nation ourselves included get nuclear weapons?

What do we do?

It seems that we make threats and in the end take action... Iran, North Korea... what about Russia?.. China? ... France?... Why stop at Iran?

Hell lets go to war with every nation that has or is seeking to have nuclear power or weapons... until we are the only ones with nukes!


Gazz



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

What is the diference between Iran having nuclear weapons and Israel? or Pakistan, India all those country have them so why US so against Iran?



Well one main difference is Israel didnt sign the NPT stating they would not develop or try to aquire nuclear weapons. Iran did and I dont think any of the five nuclear powers likes any of the countries that signed the NPT having nukes.

[edit on 18-11-2004 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 09:17 PM
link   
there are 2 things that scare me.
1 is a terrorest with a nuke
2 possums, there evil little bastards

iran has already stated that they hate and will attack the US at any oppurtunity, you want a link? stuff that just look through the piles of threads dealing with iran wanting to attack the US.
Its unfortunte that the people of this world cower infront of conflict, we huddle together ignoring the obvious trying to stay in our 'peaceful' world.
The truth is we all need to wake up thats right WAKE THE # UP, if terrorests dont have nukes now they will when iran starts producing inriched uranium.
Iran doesnt have to give them a nuke they can just give them the uranium. Hell im pretty sure terrorests have the capobility to buy the means to make a nuke, and all they need is the inriched uranium.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by seedy_sid
iran has already stated that they hate and will attack the US at any oppurtunity, you want a link?
Iran doesnt have to give them a nuke they can just give them the uranium. Hell im pretty sure terrorests have the capobility to buy the means to make a nuke, and all they need is the inriched uranium.


Yes if you do not mind I'd like a link.

Iran giving Al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups nuclear fuel or weapons is the ultimate fear.. and I agree it is far more possible than anyone is yet willing to either accept or believe.

It seems it will take an actual attack involving nuclear weapons in the UK or USA to wake people up to the ultimate battle I believe we are now faced with.

Think for a moment.. If we are attacked with a nuclear divice (god forbid) and the results are quite bad.. who will we have to target?

Al-Qaeda is in a way an army without borders or a nation.. so who do we go after?

Iran seems like the only place we may have to retaliate if attacked this way.

So are we being shown these things in advance? or is the threat from Iran as real as being shown us in the media?

Only time will tell.

Gazz



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 10:16 PM
link   
“Diplomacy” isn’t even in George’s vocabulary. He’s incapable of it, and I doubt he plans to ever use it as a tool to resolve disputes/differences. In his B/W world, you’re either with us or against us, and there’s no wiggle room in between. George’s way to settle things is with a 6 shooter and very few words. Somebody needs to tell him this isn’t the OK Corral.

Even if diplomacy were attempted, can you imagine Condi Rice having an effective dialog with the Iranians? She’d be reduced to hamburger. Without the appropriate textbook in front of her for guidance, they’d have her for lunch. I would be concerned that she may lose her temper and really foul things up, making the U.S. look even worse than they do already.

I got these impressions of her while watching her under questioning by a House committee. She answered questions evasively and got angry and pushy when challenged. Not good qualities for a Secretary of State. Unacceptable qualities when negotiating nuclear weapons policy with a perceived foe.

As far as closing the door to nuclear talks with Iran goes, I could’ve predicted it, and it’s really alarming. In past times, when we had a President of average intelligence or higher, unless there was no other choice, the door to diplomacy was always left open. It’s what civilized societies do to resolve issues. I have a feeling our refusal to discuss issues at this early stage (still in the 1st term) is a sign of things to come for awhile. This President arrogantly thinks he’s above diplomacy, his new staff are simply figureheads who will nod in agreement with him no matter what, and the rollercoaster ride begins. Instead of having the vision to lead our country into a new century of global alliances and improved relations, this administration has slammed the door shut after giving the world the finger. Brilliant move, Marshall Dillon.

If you think the world hates us now, just give it another year or 2.

I’d hate to followup George’s term in office. The cleanup could take generations …



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Ok.. I will answer with a question... How did any nation ourselves included get nuclear weapons?

What do we do?

It seems that we make threats and in the end take action... Iran, North Korea... what about Russia?.. China? ... France?... Why stop at Iran?

Hell lets go to war with every nation that has or is seeking to have nuclear power or weapons... until we are the only ones with nukes!


Gazz


Gazz, you know it is more than just that. A lot of nations are at war because of Islamic extremism.. Do you think it is a good idea to have an Islamic extremist government with nukes?...

People think that the problems of other nations do not concern us.... But what happens when Islamic extremists finish their dirty work on the countries where they are waging jihad already?....where will they turn their eyes once part of their goal is achieved?.... You yourself have given a link to Valhalls post on OBL goals...and as we have seen OBL and his network already turned their eyes towards the west....

So do we wait for Islamic extremists to finish the genocide and wars they are waging in almost half of the world and then "assume" they will leave the rest of the world alone? or do we start taking care of the problem now? Making certain they are stopped?....

Do we really even have the choice to "leave alone" those parts of the world where jihad is being waged?.... Didn't Osama and others in his network made sure that we were brought into the fray already?....

Your question is a very legitimate one Gazz, what do we do?



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I dissagree with most of what marge says, because I voted for Bush (again) and I agree with his policies more then Kerry's, BUT, she did bring up a good point on why isn't the US "liberating" the North Koreans. My only answer that I can think of is that the US sees NK as a flame in a metal container, eventualy it will just burn itself out. Since the whole country is in shambles.

I also believe that Iran is next on the "Evil" list, BUT ITS NOT ON THERE FOR OIL! If the Iranians stoped making nuclear material and stuck with conventional weapons, then the US would back down. The US can only be threatend by nuclear weapons, so it makes sense for a country to not wanting to bow-down to the US, and the ace up there sleeve is a nuclear warhead. But if they take that path the US will take em out before they get the ace.

Nearly everyday we hear about Iran on the news, and its never good news. I think this is the goverments way of preparing us to the thought of the US pre-emptivly striking Iran. But you have to remember that the US is not going to do a major assault (like Iraq), it will only go after there nuclear facilities and nuclear material buildings and there launch sites, there will be no troops.

However I just hope that this time around the military thinks about every Iranian reaction to a US action. Like, if we do only take out there nuke sites, what if they respond to this by sending thousands of troops to Iraq or fire there normal missiles at public buildings or US embassies, there is several things they could do, hell they might allready have a hidden silo armed with a nuclear warhead waiting to launch the day that USAF starts bombing them.

But I still say that we should not allow Iran to get their hands on Nukes.



posted on Nov, 19 2004 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Actually ML, I agree with you, but the real treat of Iran is not to the United States but to Isreal. However, as i put forth in another thread what we are seeing is the multiple failures to contain NK. Pleanty of partisan blame to spread forth. Other countries see the way NK is able to bluster becuase they have nukes and now see it as a national security exersize. ie. maybe they won't invade and we can negotiate etc. Its totally understandable from the Iranians point of view.

I agree quite frankly that Kim in NK is the bigger threat



posted on Nov, 19 2004 @ 12:06 AM
link   
So what? Iran wants nukes so it can defend against possible future American imperialism as cowboy Bush continues his violent crusade to destroy anyone who doesen't agree with his right-wing agenda.

If USA has nukes why not everyone else? It's just to show you how the USA always tries to be the dominate power and wants everyone else to be helpless and weak and prone to easily occupation.

We don't need more mass slaughtering of civilians and militant activity in countries they were originally quite stable as was Iraq.. Perhaps Saddam didn't thump his bible and allow the corporations to run the government as in the USA... so Bush had to rid of him of course.

I believe in the right for Iran to defend itself from American aggression.. as should any other country being forcefully attacked by the imperialists.

I do not feel sorry for any US soldiers who die over there.. I only feel sorry for innocents who were killed doing nothing more than living the daily life.

Maybe someone has to rid of Bush.. literally.

You see, the right has an agenda where they push one country over another.. they have little interest in anything besides nationalism. Barely any of these right-wing fools have seen any actual warfare and never seen his fellow man get slaughtered infront of him. So it's easy to say "we better wage war on there land"


[edit on 19-11-2004 by RedOctober90]



posted on Nov, 19 2004 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedOctober90
Maybe someone has to rid of Bush.. literally.


You need to be very very carefull with stuff like that unless you want to have a cozzy interview with the Secret Service who HAS no sence of humor.

While Iran (as I posted above) may see its need for nuclear weapons, that does not mean they should be allowed to have them. Proliferation will be the end of the world if we allow it to continue un checked. Can you imagine if every tinhorn or banna republic had nukes? Christ betterstart building a bunker.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join