Iran-the 3rd Leg

[Annie]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/nm/20040612/wl_nm/nuclear_iran_dc

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran on Saturday rejected European demands that it freeze additional parts of its atomic program, saying it would push on with plans to build a heavy-water reactor.

 

[Avatar4321]

well then i hope they arent surprised when we bomb the crap out of their reactor.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
well then i hope they arent surprised when we bomb the crap out of their reactor.

More likely Israel, with US air cover backing.

 

[dilloduck]

A good excuse for them to invade iraq

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by dilloduck
A good excuse for them to invade iraq

Who? Iran?

 

[dilloduck]

Originally posted by Kathianne
Who? Iran?

yup

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by dilloduck
yup

But they're already there. http://michnews.com/artman/publish/article_3937.shtml

 

[dilloduck]

I know--but an excuse for an all out invasion would be playing into the hands of th extremists would it not?

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by dilloduck
I know--but an excuse for an all out invasion would be playing into the hands of th extremists would it not?

They had a difficult time with Saddam, you think they want to take on the US and coalition?

 

[dilloduck]

Originally posted by Kathianne
They had a difficult time with Saddam, you think they want to take on the US and coalition?

well-- it was Saddam with US help against Iran so I'm not really sure. With the instability of the political situation there, the Imams could use the bombing as a rallying point. I agree it would be risky but it may also garner other Arab support.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by dilloduck
well-- it was Saddam with US help against Iran so I'm not really sure. With the instability of the political situation there, the Imams could use the bombing as a rallying point. I agree it would be risky but it may also garner other Arab support.

Dillo, they can't be bombing much more than they are. Something is going to give over there. I doubt very much that Bush is happy Iran piped up at the current time.

 

[Palestinian Jew]

There already is a strong movement in Iran to overthrow the Imams, I think the US should back them, overthrow the gov't, then take out the nuke facilities.

 

[Mustafa]

Originally posted by Palestinian Jew

There already is a strong movement in Iran to overthrow the Imams, I think the US should back them, overthrow the gov't, then take out the nuke facilities.

The extremist Iranian clerics have already voided the reform secularists so that only themselves can be elected.

If you are waiting for the people of Iran to overthrow their radical religious leaders, you might want to wait until our sun burns out.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by Palestinian Jew
There already is a strong movement in Iran to overthrow the Imams, I think the US should back them, overthrow the gov't, then take out the nuke facilities.

The revolutionary movement has been crushed for the forseeable future. The danger is real from Iran:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1087100111430


Jun. 13, 2004 19:10
Sanction Iran


In October, the foreign ministers of the United Kingdom, France, and Germany (known as the EU-3) went to Teheran and came back with a deal: Iran gives up its nuclear ambitions in exchange for better trade relations with the West. The mullahs were given six months to comply.

Eight months later, the jury is in. On June 1, International Atomic Energy Agency Director-General Mohamed El-Baradei issued a report that was full of smoking guns. In diplomatic language, it caught Iran in lie after lie.

Iran was supposed to declare all its enrichment facilities, yet it neglected to mention it had P-2 centrifuges – a particularly sophisticated type used only for weapons-grade enrichment. Inspectors discovered laser enrichment equipment; which again, reasonably points only to a weapons program. Finally, the IAEA found plutonium-separation experiments, and enriched uranium that the Iranians incredibly brush off as contamination from imported material.

The report, issued in advance for the IAEA Board of Governors meeting this week, notes that Iran was given time to clear up all these "omissions" and "outstanding questions." None of them was. Iran, if anything, is becoming more brazen.

On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi openly declared Iran's right to become "a member of the nuclear club." He also rejected US and European demands that it give up its assorted uranium enrichment programs. Finally, he confirmed that Iran had tried to buy 4,000 magnets for uranium enrichment purposes, but said this issue had been "unnecessarily" hyped.

We have gotten to the point at which, in the words of reporter James Traub in yesterday's New York Times Magazine, "What is nonnegotiable to the Iranians is unacceptable to the Bush administration, the EU-3, and Baradei himself."
This should not be a surprise. The last eight months have been spent pretending either that Iran's nuclear ambitions were in question, or would be given up in response on the vague waving of carrots and sticks.

Whether it says so in so many words, the IAEA has succeeded in proving that Iran is bent on enriching nuclear fuel in a way that points in only one direction: nuclear weapons. This has put the international watchdog agency in a bind – if it is not forthright and aggressive, it will be duped as it was before the first war in Iraq, in which it gave a clean bill of health to facilities that were later proven to be the heart of Saddam's nuclear weapons program. But if it declares Iran to be in outright violation, the IAEA fears that Iran will follow North Korea's lead and simply withdraw from the treaty, which would end inspections and remove the IAEA from the ball game.

Such institutional dilemmas should not be allowed to drive the international agenda. Iran's intentions are crystal clear. The time has come for a simple question: Does Europe want Iran to go nuclear?

The long, sad story of sanctions against Iraq shows that economic pressure alone does not always produce cooperation. Yet if sanctions are not enough, than surely cajoling short of sanctions is a waste of precious time. Further, the more relevant precedent may not be the failure of sanctions in Iraq, but their success in Libya.

Faced with a united Security Council that imposed draconian sanctions in response to the downing of an American and a French airliner, having been caught red-handed smuggling nuclear equipment, and seeing Saddam Hussein having his teeth examined by a US Army medic, Muammar Gaddafi said that he had enough. He revealed a nuclear program the West did not even know he had and, pending verification, has gotten out of the terrorism business.

Iran is arguably more susceptible to such sanctions than was Libya. The Iranian economy is considerably larger, more advanced, and more dependent on the West than is Libya's. In Europe, Iranian diplomats are not used to being treated as pariahs. The Iranian people, while it may support the quest for the bomb, is likely to blame a government that it hates for any further hardships imposed by the international community.

To some, standing up to Iran's brazen nuclear bid will be seen as starting another war. It is the opposite. It is not too late to attempt, by economic means alone, forcing Iran to go the way of Libya and getting out of the nuclear and terrorism business. The longer Europe and the US wait to act, the more the options will become limited to living with Iran as a terrorist base with a nuclear umbrella, or taking military action.

 

[Palestinian Jew]

I know they can't overthrow the gov't by themselves, thats why I said the US should help them to whatever extent is needed.

 

[Annie]

Plan B

From the
AP

Toughening its stance in advance of a meeting of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, Iran on Saturday said it would reject international restrictions on its nuclear program and challenged the world to accept Tehran as a member of the "nuclear club."
Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi rejected further outside influence on Tehran's nuclear ambitions two days before the International Atomic Energy Agency board of governors meets to discuss Iran's highly controversial program.

"We won't accept any new obligations," Kharrazi said. "Iran has a high technical capability and has to be recognized by the international community as a member of the nuclear club. This is an irreversible path."


Meanwhile, the Euros still just want to talk: Musavian went on to say that the draft resolution prepared by Britain, France, and Germany for the IAEA Board is not dissimilar to IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei’s recent report on Iran’s nuclear activities.
He stressed that the three countries expressed appreciation of Iran’s cooperation with the agency in the resolution and have officially recognized the authenticity of IAEA inspections in Iran.

However, by referring to minor remaining issues between Iran and the IAEA, European countries are trying to force Iran to extend its suspension of uranium enrichment and to permit the agency to gain control over the UCF project in Isfahan and the heavy water installations in Arak, he added.


Yeah, that ought to work.

How about instead, an offer of one-hundred million dollars in financial and material support to any Iranian group willing to form a Provisional Government. An easy-to-reach coastal city would do nicely for the new (and hopefully temporary) capital.


Posted by Stephen Green at 06:02 PM | Drinks (0)

http://www.vodkapundit.com/archives/005982.php#005982

 

[Annie]

I really should be going to bed, but just saw this on WSJ and thought, how appropriate. Does it remind us of another time, another country, but the same rhetoric?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005213

A bit:

Coddling the Mullahs
The world shrugs as Iran builds its nuclear bomb.

Monday, June 14, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT

If Iran goes nuclear within the next year or two, don't blame the inspectors at the International Atomic Energy Agency. Earlier this month Mohammed ElBaradei's U.N. team issued yet another damning report on the mullahs, describing a pattern of deception and non-cooperation that all but screams "bomb program." But the international community, with the apparent acquiescence of the Bush Administration, is treating it all as a matter of indifference.

OK, that's a mild overstatement. IAEA member states have been going through the motions required by their inspection process. But when they meet today in Vienna the consuming issue will be whether to "deplore" Iran's deceptions or note them with "serious concern." The Iranians are protesting that they consider even those words as all but a casus belli, but they are reported to be privately pleased as punch that the IAEA will yet again fail to refer them to the U.N. Security Council for sanction....

AND THE MONEY PARAGRAPH:

Last year the U.S. deferred to the Europeans as they brokered an inspection agreement with Iran that the mullahs have since violated with impunity. In other words, the "multilateral" diplomatic path is failing. The question is whether anyone important is going to admit this reality. If not, we at least hope Washington is preparing covert and military options to sabotage the Iranian program, and to step up aid to those Iranians wishing a fundamental change in their terror-sponsoring regime. History will not look kindly on the leaders who let Iran get the bomb on their watch.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by Kathianne
More likely Israel, with US air cover backing.

I'm not the only one thinking this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/06/14/ixopinion.html

A nuclear Iran would precipitate a Middle East arms race that could prompt Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to secure their own nukes. Israel is unlikely to sit idly by while Iran arms itself with atomic weapons and long-range missiles.

 

[Annie]

Well here I am not only answering myself, but using the same source with minutes. I know I would find such suspect. But sometimes a woman has to do what a woman has to do:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=11385_UN_Springs_Into_Action

UN Springs Into Action

U.N. Nuke Chief: Iran Must Come Clean ‘Within Months’.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/nm/20040614/wl_nm/nuclear_iran_dc

VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran is not fully cooperating with U.N. inspectors and must come clean about the full extent of its nuclear program within months, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Monday.

Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran’s cooperation has been “less than satisfactory” and warned that the process of clarifying unresolved issues — particularly over Iran’s uranium enrichment activities — could not be allowed to drag on for ever.

“It is essential for the integrity and credibility of the inspection process that we are able to bring these issues to a close within the next few months, and provide the international community with the assurances it urgently seeks regarding Iran’s nuclear activities,” he told the IAEA’s board of governors.

And if Iran still won’t cooperate after “the next few months” (a woefully inexact timeframe in which to deal with an Islamic state rushing to build nukes), the UN will no doubt spring into action again and pass another resolution. Maybe even a harshly worded resolution.

by Charles at 10:33 AM PST | 64 comments | link | rss
last comment: Billy Hank 2:52:40 pm 6/14/04
email this article