|
23 Nov 06 - 06:52 AM (#1891543) Subject: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: beardedbruce Iran: We press ahead with reactor POSTED: 5:50 a.m. EST, November 23, 2006 Adjust font size: TEHRAN, Iran (Reuters) -- Iran said on Thursday it would like technical aid from the U.N. atomic watchdog for its Arak heavy water reactor but would press ahead even if its request was eventually rejected. "If they help us, we will appreciate it. If not, we will do it by ourselves," Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told reporters shortly before diplomats in Vienna said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had indefinitely blocked Iran's request. After the remarks by diplomats, a Foreign Ministry spokesman declined to comment further saying he would wait until a formal announcement by IAEA board of governors. The diplomats said Iran's request for help on Arak was rejected to due to fears it could yield bomb-grade plutonium. The West fears Iran is trying to build atomic bombs, despite Tehran's denials. In a compromise hammered out in negotiations ahead of the IAEA board meeting, Iranian requests for IAEA technical assistance on seven other nuclear energy projects judged not to pose a risk of being diverted to bomb-making were approved by the governors. |
|
23 Nov 06 - 10:20 AM (#1891707) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies Your point? Do you want Iran bombed now to stop what you see as dangerous developments? Yes or no. If not, what do you want? |
|
23 Nov 06 - 07:29 PM (#1892131) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: beardedbruce Sorry if you can't blame this one on Bush. My POINT is that the demands of idiots like YOU to let the UN, and then EU negotiate to solve the problems have been unsuccessful. NOW, WHAT are YOU going to do about it??? Do you want Europe, Israel, or Europe bombed now to avoid having to deal with a known problem? Yes or no. If not, what do you want? |
|
23 Nov 06 - 07:33 PM (#1892133) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: beardedbruce sorry, should be "Do you want Europe, Israel, or the US bombed now to avoid having to deal with a known problem? Yes or no. If not, what do you want? " |
|
23 Nov 06 - 07:46 PM (#1892142) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow There are a lot of countries with nuclear mweapons. Too many. It's a threat to all of us. And there are a lot more countries which could well develop them. When countries who are themselves armed with nuclear weapons threaten to attack Iran, that is the best way to push it into getting hold of nuclear weapons. When neighbouring countries which do not have nuclear weapons are attacked, that is another way of achieving the same result. |
|
23 Nov 06 - 08:14 PM (#1892153) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies BB-- Temper, temper, little man. My question was completely reasonable. And, as I recall, you brought up the topic. |
|
23 Nov 06 - 08:16 PM (#1892156) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies And, as usual with intellectual giants like your good self--(what? you don't like being called an intellectual giant?)----you haven't answered the question. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 07:53 AM (#1892377) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: beardedbruce RD, I AM about twice the man you are, so... Still waiting on YOUR answer. I have been bringing up news points on Iran, N. Korea, and Sudan to show that Bobert is right- you CAN"T continue to do the same thing ( talk without meaningful actions) and expect a different result than you have obtained in the past. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 08:06 AM (#1892393) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow Shouldn't the first question, asked by Ron, be answered first, before beardedbruce gets his answer? |
|
24 Nov 06 - 08:06 AM (#1892394) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies BB-- I'm sorry I don't engage in junior high contests--"who's the most masculine?". Have fun in yours. And I'm still waiting for your answer. As I said, you brought up the topic--and my question is totally legitimate. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 08:12 AM (#1892398) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: beardedbruce OK. I want the UN to tell Iran that it can either comply with the treaties it signed to GET nuclear technology, with full inspections by teams of multiple observers allowed into all appropriate areas, OR that the UN takes action, begining with stiff sanctions and continuing up to and including military force ( as was done in Korea 1952) until Iran complies. And I want the UN to follow through. NOW, Answer my question. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 10:48 AM (#1892494) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies Look, BB. There are all sorts of countries with the capability to develop nuclear weapons--including Brazil and Japan. Some, like Israel, already have them--or don't you think so? Your concern, I suspect strongly, is with the statements by Mr. A of Iran that Israel should be wiped off the map. It seems clear to me that what we should be doing is not saber-rattling against Iran--that only strengthens the hard-liners--but trying to isolate him within Iran by strengthening the more moderate voices. By increasing trade, by stopping loose talk about "regime change", by flooding Iran with all the decadent capitalist goods, pop music etc they want, by investing in Iran--investors acquire a lot of power in a country--especially when the companies hire those citizens. Mr A is not the only voice in Iran--and considered a loose cannon by many Iranians---who would only close ranks behind him if forced to---by a US attack. Which seems to be what you are angling for. It will not help your cause. You can forget about strong UN sanctions against Iran--as long as Japan, China, and Western Europe are so dependent on Iranian oil. And Russia has plans to help Iran develop nuclear plants. We can also stop our participation in the disaster in Iraq. Bush's criminally stupid invasion has strengthened Islamic radicals world-wide-- including Hezbollah, as I've pointed out--and been the best recruiting tool Osama could want. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 11:35 AM (#1892522) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow This quote about "Israel should be wiped off the map", and the implication that what is envisaged is a nuclear attack - both the interpretation given to it, and the very words are pretty questionable. Here is a lengthy extract from the text, which seems to include the passage which has been translated in this way. The context is a passage where he lists a number of regimes which seemed totally secure, which have been swept away in recent years - the Shah's regime in Iran, "Eastern Imperialism" (the USSR), and Saddam Hussein. In that context he looks forward to a similar end to the existing regime in part of what was Palestine. It's perfectly reasonable that people should differ from his view of what is possible or desirable, or should even speculate as to how far what he said represented his true position. However "Know your enemy" has always been a sensible maxim, and knowing your enemy means getting things like this right, not adjusting quotes to say what you want to make them say. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 01:21 PM (#1892594) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: GUEST,Gza This is just another completely phony, trumped-up "crisis" which the USA and Britain are trying to sell to their public. Iraq was no real threat to anyone when they were accused of hiding "Weapons of Mass Destruction"...but they were depicted as an immediate danger to the entire world! They "had to be stopped". LOL! The same type of scam is being attempted regarding Iran, and Bearded Bruce has bought it. No big surprise there. It's amazing how they just keep pulling the same tired old rabbit out of the hat whenever they want to invade and take over some small country...and people buy it. That's the incredible part. Meanwhile the countries that DO attack people regularly and ARE an ever-present danger to world peace and DO have WMD's coming out their ears (the USA, Britain, and Israel) rave on about how they are going to protect themselves and the rest of us from dangerous people like the Iranians. What a farce. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 08:39 PM (#1892856) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies Kevin-- "Very soon this stain of disgrace (Israel) will be purged from the center of the Islamic world". That's fairly clear. And "very soon" would certainly raise legitimate concern in Israel. The main question is to what extent this represents Iranian public opinion--and what the best way is to strengthen other views. It's also clear to me that Bearded Bruce's answer to this question will not help solve the problem. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 09:17 PM (#1892870) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow It seems to me that, in the context of that speech, he is anticipating a simlar kind of "purging" as happened in the overthrow of the other regimes he points at, one of which happened by internal collapse, one by popular revolution, and one by a convenient American invasion which eliminated a powerful enemy of Iran without a need to lift a finger. It does sound to me more like a politician whistling in the wind, and talking up the possibility of a future intifada rather than revealing plans for making war, let alone the suicidal nuclear attack which it has been widely interpreted as meaning. "Very soon" can mean anything. In the context where the Crusader Kingdoms are seen as a precedent for Israel, "very soon" could mean a century or two. I'm rather reminded of the way Kruschev's words translated as "We will bury you" were widely interpreted as a prophecy of war. In fact the words were more accurately translated as "we will attend your funeral", and were essentially about competition between economic systems - the competition which in the end did end in the "funeral" of one of the systems, just not the one Kruschev had predicted. |
|
24 Nov 06 - 10:09 PM (#1892883) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: GUEST,Gza "It does sound to me more like a politician whistling in the wind" Exactly. He is expressing some wishful thinking that the Israeli system should fail and be replaced by something else, just like American politicians frequently express wishful thinking that the present Iranian system will fail and be replaced by something else. People who interpret such statements as Ahmadinejad's as a literal war threat are also expressing a sort of wishful thinking of their own, because they are the very people who are searching around rather desperately for a good enough excuse to get public support behind launching another unprovoked pre-emptive war...this time on Iran. Yes, the Krushchev statement was likewise interpreted in the most inflammatory and paranoid fashion possible at the time by various people who wanted to inflame the Cold War situation, draw attention to themselves, and land some more big, lucrative military spending contracts. This sort of nonsense goes on all the time, and it's 99% propaganda. They will search every speech the Iranians make for any shred of an excuse to justify building a greater crisis. They will ignore and not report on moderate things that are said by Iran, because it would not help advance their cause. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 12:12 AM (#1892941) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies We may see it as that. But, guaranteed, many Israelis see it as considerably more threatening. And we have to be willing to see it from that perspective too. My point is that BB's "solution" will not help--and we could do things to strengthen the less hardline figures in Iran. As a card-carrying capitalist ( in contrast to some on Mudcat), I still feel that Western culture and Western goods--which many Iranians want--are a much better way to undermine any hardcore fundamentalist regime than sabre-rattling. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 07:45 AM (#1893112) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: GUEST,beardedbruce RD, " want the UN to tell Iran that it can either comply with the treaties it signed to GET nuclear technology, with full inspections by teams of multiple observers allowed into all appropriate areas, OR that the UN takes action, begining with stiff sanctions and continuing up to and including military force ( as was done in Korea 1952) until Iran complies. And I want the UN to follow through." You have stated that YOU think my solution woould not work. Would you be so kind as to present your own "Final Solution" that YOU think will do any better? Shall I presume that YOU would have the US act unilaterally, rather than through the UN? Or that there should be NO effort to have Iran comply with UN treaties and resolutions, as you believed in the case of Iraq? |
|
25 Nov 06 - 08:47 AM (#1893131) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies BB-- I've already told you my view. It's a process, not a "Final Solution"--and I would think you would not like that phrase--and would not advocate anybody's "Final Solution". (Yes I am aware you may be bitterly sarcastic). More trade, not less, is the way to go with Iran. Make the population realize that the rest of the world is not against Iran. The more self-expression and the more capitalist goods there are, the harder for a fundamentalist regime to survive. (We can keep the child pornography out--that does not help our case). But Western agents like Nickolodeon, Disney, i-Tunes, etc. will make our case with the population--and will show them that Mr A is wrong--that it's not necessary for Iran to have nuclear weapons to protect itself from a vaunted conspiracy by the West against it. It will also help when Mr. Bush leaves the Oval Office permanently in 2009. Your ideas will only make the situation worse--and any invasion of or attack on Iran will only unite the population behind Mr. A. You may also be interested to know that, according to the Wall St Journal yesterday (25 November 2006), the US is now trying to contain Iran by putting together an alliance of Sunni leaders in the region. The likely price by the Sunnis---they will probably push the US to be "more assertive in promoting peace between Israel and the Palestinians." Translation: don't be so blatantly pro-Israel--take Palestinian wishes into consideration. Hope you're happy. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 11:50 AM (#1893258) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies "Nickelodeon"--knew I spelled that wrong--it didn't look right. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 01:13 PM (#1893318) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow "And will show them that Mr A is wrong--that it's not necessary for Iran to have nuclear weapons to protect itself from a vaunted conspiracy by the West against it." The trouble is, there are people who appear anxious to organise just such a conspiracy. And when you have the President of the United States talking about "an Axis of Terror" including Iran, and all that, it was bound to reinforce the feeling among Iranians that they do face the prospect of the same kind of attack that they have seen on their closest neighbours. It was that kind of thing that helped Ahmadinejad be elected as president in 2005. When you are dealing with a country with an elected government rather than a dictatorship you do really have to be careful about that kind of thing. Assad in Syria can shrug off that kind of talk as politicking, but there's an electorate in Iran that is liable to take that kind of talk as serious rather than as politicking bluster. It's rather like what Ron said a couple of posts ago: "We may see it as that. But, guaranteed, many Israelis see it as considerably more threatening." When politicians make threatening noises for the benefit of their own domestic audience, they can frighten the people at the other end into putting their trust in extremists. Iranians do want the kind of toys and fun stuff that Ron mentioned - but that gets pushed into second place when they are faced with what seem like threats of invasion and bombardment. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 02:16 PM (#1893366) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies Yes, probably the best thing anybody could do for peace would be to muzzle Bush. Too bad that won't happen til 2009. But it's amazing to me that Bush and co., who claim to believe in the worldwide benefits of capitalism, are not willing to even give their own theory a try by concentrating on breaking down trade barriers with Iran--instead of pushing for a total cutoff of Western commercial ties with it. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 02:34 PM (#1893377) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow But surely the stuff about free trade and open markets and all that is lagely PR, for people like that - in reality the game, for the big players, has always been about cornering stuff and rigging prices and cutting deals and establishing effective monopolies wherever possible. And that's actually easier on an international level, because there's no needs to worry about your domestic Trust Laws and suchlike, and it's always possible to find a country with a government that won't make waves. Sanctions against a country with enormous stocks of oil? That just means an opportunity for crafty entrepreneurs to make loads of money by getting round the sanctions, the way it did in the case of Iraq. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 03:39 PM (#1893414) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: GUEST,petr back in the 70's the US helped Iran with nuclear technology.. (this from Noam Chomsky.info) Thirty years ago, however, when Kissinger was secretary of state for President Gerald Ford, he held that "introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran's economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals". Last year Dafna Linzer of the Washington Post asked Kissinger about his reversal of opinion. Kissinger responded with his usual engaging frankness: "They were an allied country." In 1976 the Ford administration "endorsed Iranian plans to build a massive nuclear energy industry, but also worked hard to complete a multibillion-dollar deal that would have given Teheran control of large quantities of plutonium and enriched uranium — the two pathways to a nuclear bomb", Linzer wrote. The top planners of the Bush administration, who are now denouncing these programmes, were then in key national security posts: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. I think that pretty much sums up who are the real Idiots. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 03:52 PM (#1893426) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: GUEST,Gza As always, it is Realpolitik that drives the rhetoric of the superpower. Friends and allies can do no wrong. Those who are not friends can do no right. It's cynical, it's self-serving, it has nothing to do with spreading democracy or freedom, it has everything to do with enlarging corporate profits and achieving military hegemony over the globe. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 05:14 PM (#1893487) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow A bit naive to assume that today's ally isn't quite likely going to be tomorriow's enemy. Or the other way round. Real realpolitik would mtakem this into account. These guys are amateurs. Pokerplayers trying to play chess. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 07:42 PM (#1893578) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: GUEST,Gza Well, yes. I'd agree with that. Kissinger is no amateur, though. |
|
25 Nov 06 - 07:51 PM (#1893592) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow But assuming that Iran would continue to be an "ally" of America - meaning a client state - was not very clever. Rather like assuming today that Saudia Arabia or Pakistan will continue to be "on our side". |
|
25 Nov 06 - 08:37 PM (#1893612) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: GUEST,Gza An excellent pair of examples! Realpolitik will probably find Pakistan out in the cold at some point, since being "friends" with India will be deemed considerably more important. |
|
26 Nov 06 - 11:05 AM (#1893949) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Ron Davies They say that "talk-talk is better than war-war". I'd say that "buy-sell" is also better than "war-war." And it's very telling that the Bushites don't seem to agree. |
|
19 Dec 06 - 05:53 AM (#1913412) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Wolfgang Iranian students hide in fear for lives after venting fury at Ahmadinejad Iranian student activists who staged an angry protest against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last week have gone into hiding in fear for their lives after his supporters threatened them with revenge. Much better to use/support the growing discontent with the regime than to foster Iranian national unity by an external threat. Wolfgang |
|
19 Dec 06 - 06:21 AM (#1913427) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: McGrath of Harlow As evidenced here: Poll blow for Iran's Ahmadinejad |
|
30 Jan 07 - 09:09 AM (#1952329) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Wolfgang Another voice against a brute force approach: Only the US hawks can save the Iranian president now (comment in the GUARDIAN) Ahmadinejad is failing to deliver for the poor and losing support, but he could yet survive because of the international threat Wolfgang |
|
31 Jan 07 - 07:38 AM (#1953380) Subject: RE: BS: more progress- Iran. ??? From: Wolfgang Once more I read a good comment in the GUARDIAN: The neocons have learned nothing from five years of catastrophe What I find remarkable about the neoconservative line of argument on Iran, however, is how little changed it is in its basic assumptions and tonalities from that taken on Iraq in 2002, despite the momentous events of the past five years and the manifest failure of policies that neoconservatives themselves advocated. What may change is the American public's willingness to listen to them. Wolfgang |