• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Oh look, an unclenched fist!

And all we had to do was allow Iran to enrich all the uranium they want!
Iran's uranium enrichment program has been the key point of contention. The Bush administration had insisted that Iran scrap enrichment before talks could begin — a demand Iran repeatedly rejected. On Wednesday, a senior official said the U.S. would be prepared to let Tehran continue enriching uranium at the current level for some time.
Click to expand...
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jG7bnyWWJfgaYD-JwcqmImlpRujwD97J5SM01

Who knew it would be so easy? All we have to do is give them what they want!
 
WildCat said:
And all we had to do was allow Iran to enrich all the uranium they want!

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jG7bnyWWJfgaYD-JwcqmImlpRujwD97J5SM01

Who knew it would be so easy? All we have to do is give them what they want!
Click to expand...

or in other words, respect Irans right and signed treatys.

Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.
 
Meanwhile, in France...
The American President’s call “to free the world of the menace of a nuclear nightmare” was hot air, Mr Sarkozy’s diplomatic staff told him in a report. “It was rhetoric – not a speech on American security policy but an export model aimed at improving the image of the United States,” they said. Most of Mr Obama’s proposals had already been made by the Bush administration and Washington was dragging its feet on disarmament and treaties against nuclear proliferation, the leaked report said.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the Iranian regime thinks Obama is being sincere? I wonder if the Iranian regime is being any more sincere than the French government thinks Obama is being?
 
theprestige said:
I wonder if the Iranian regime thinks Obama is being sincere? I wonder if the Iranian regime is being any more sincere than the French government thinks Obama is being?
Click to expand...

We'll find out in the fullness of time, but it's certainly an improvement on the hawks of the past.

Delightful to see the falconers immediately jumping in, though.
 
It's all about having an enemy to rail against.
Now that they have Somali Jack Sparrow to stick in the media, Iran is, as it were, off the hook.
(Pun tragically intended)
 
<bit of a derail>
Oh look, an unclenched fist!
Click to expand...
Sounds like a riddle on the order of, What do you call a boomerang that doesn't come back?
</derail>

Back on topic: I'm mostly in agreement with Dictator Cheney. I never understood how we can continue to ignore the NPT's second pillar (disarmament) and try to claim that Iran is in violation of the third pillar (peaceful use). At the very least, we should come up with something other than the NPT to make our case.
 
dudalb said:
I am amused by how so many "progressives" embrace the regime in Iran.
Click to expand...

I am amused by how you use the word "progressive" to mean "anyone that disagrees with me", and then claim that they're "embracing the regime in Iran" because they don't believe in enacting the policies you want to exist.

A bit of "If you're not with us, you're against us" mentality. That really amuses me.
 
With it's long history of supporting Hizbollah and other Shiia extremists groups I see no reason to trust the current Iranian regime.
And for some reason people cut it a LOT more slack then they do other right wing theocratic regimes.
I am not against talking to Iran, I just think they have a long way to go before I will trust them, and I think a lot of people are being very naive.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
With it's long history of supporting Hizbollah and other Shiia extremists groups I see no reason to trust the current Iranian regime.
And for some reason people cut it a LOT more slack then they do other right wing theocratic regimes.
I am not against talking to Iran, I just think they have a long way to go before I will trust them, and I think a lot of people are being very naive.
Click to expand...

trust is good.
Inspection is better.
 
WildCat said:
And Iran isn't allowing inspections, so where does that leave us?
Click to expand...


oh really?

On 29 September 2008, the Agency conducted a physical inventory verification (PIV) at the Pilot
Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP)....

All nuclear material at PFEP, as well as the cascade area,
remains under Agency containment and surveillance......

Since March 2007, twenty unannounced inspections have been conducted at FEP......

The Agency has continued to monitor the use and construction of hot cells at the Tehran
Research Reactor (TRR) and the Molybdenum, Iodine and Xenon Radioisotope Production (MIX)
Facility through inspections and design information verification (DIV)......

On 13 August 2008, the Agency conducted a PIV at the Fuel Manufacturing Plant (FMP),....

On 18 October 2008, the Agency conducted an inspection......
Click to expand...

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2008/gov2008-59.pdf

Maybe we have now a better position to ask Iran to sign the Additional Protocol.
 
Last edited:
Dictator Cheney said:
oh really?
Click to expand...
Really:
IAEA board members will also voice deep concern over the agency's "deteriorating knowledge," cited by the report, about the scope of Iranian nuclear activity.

In April, Iran stopped providing advance design information on planned nuclear sites, such as a heavy-water reactor.

For over a year, Iran has limited inspections to declared nuclear sites, barring short-notice visits to other areas to probe indications of undeclared activity with military links.
Click to expand...



Dictator Cheney said:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2008/gov2008-59.pdf
Click to expand...
And from your own link:
On 2 April 2008, the Agency requested Iran to provide, as a transparency measure, access to additional locations related, inter alia, to the manufacturing of centrifuges, R&D on uranium enrichment, and uranium mining and milling (GOV/2008/15, para. 13). Iran has not yet agreed to the Agency’s request.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom