The US REJECTS Israeli arms request
Comments
-
did you even read my post? I already responded to this. ElBaradei has been given more access to the Iranian nuclear facilities than any other country in the world - including the lovely democracy of Israel. your one quote of him not being completely satisfied does not contradict the fact that the IAEA report showed that there is no sign that their program is not for peaceful purposes, and that they have no been enriching uranium at a high level.spyguy wrote:you posted 3 articles and I quoted the first article.....
However, he said that the progress is still not enough and the IAEA was still unable to give a definite verdict on Tehran's nuclear ambitions. "Iran in the past few months has provided us with visits to many places, that enable us to have a clearer picture of Iran's current program. However, that is not, in my view, sufficient," ElBaradei said.
the other articles are from august 07. outdated information
and 1 year in terms of nuclear enrichment is not very long. to say that info is outdated is an overstatement. however, you still ignored my entire response. not surprising though.0 -
_outlaw wrote:did you even read my post? I already responded to this. ElBaradei has been given more access to the Iranian nuclear facilities than any other country in the world - including the lovely democracy of Israel. your one quote of him not being completely satisfied does not contradict the fact that the IAEA report showed that there is no sign that their program is not for peaceful purposes, and that they have no been enriching uranium at a high level.
I'm only quoting what he said. yes they have been given access but IAEA is still not satisfied. what is that so hard for you to understand?_outlaw wrote:and 1 year in terms of nuclear enrichment is not very long. to say that info is outdated is an overstatement. however, you still ignored my entire response. not surprising though.
why would I respond to you crap when you thought your own article was only 6 months old. but its ok for you to ignore my post huh? here it is again since you ignored it...
or you can check the latest UN Sanations document here.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus...s1803-2008.pdf
Noting with serious concern that, as confirmed by the reports of 23 May 2007
(GOV/2007/22), 30 August 2007 (GOV/2007/48), 15 November 2007
(GOV/2007/58) and 22 February 2008 (GOV/2008/4) of the Director General of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran has not established full and
sustained suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing activities and heavy
water-related projects as set out in resolution 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), and 1747
(2007), nor resumed its cooperation with the IAEA under the Additional Protocol,
nor taken the other steps required by the IAEA Board of Governors, nor complied
with the provisions of Security Council resolution 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006) and
1747 (2007) and which are essential to build confidence, and deploring Iran’s refusal to take these steps,Noting with concern that Iran has taken issue with the IAEA’s right to verify design information which had been provided by Iran pursuant to the modified
Code 3.1, emphasizing that in accordance with Article 39 of Iran’s Safeguards
Agreement Code 3.1 cannot be modified nor suspended unilaterally and that the
Agency’s right to verify design information provided to it is a continuing right,0 -
what the hell are you talking about. the IAEA has been given a tremendous amount of cooperation by the Iranians - MORE THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY. If they aren't satisfied from Iran's cooperation, then they are SURELY not satisfied from virtually every country in the world.spyguy wrote:I'm only quoting what he said. yes they have been given access but IAEA is still not satisfied. what is that so hard for you to understand?
I was referring to the earlier article from February, which is so painfully obvious that it's sad to see you still argue this. you're only trying to make up bullshit excuses for not responding to my post.why would I respond to you crap when you thought your own article was only 6 months old.
this is a UN security resolution, what the hell is your point. this proves nothing.but its ok for you to ignore my post huh? here it is again since you ignored it...
or you can check the latest UN Sanations document here.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus...s1803-2008.pdf
Noting with serious concern that, as confirmed by the reports of 23 May 2007
(GOV/2007/22), 30 August 2007 (GOV/2007/48), 15 November 2007
(GOV/2007/58) and 22 February 2008 (GOV/2008/4) of the Director General of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran has not established full and
sustained suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing activities and heavy
water-related projects as set out in resolution 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), and 1747
(2007), nor resumed its cooperation with the IAEA under the Additional Protocol,
nor taken the other steps required by the IAEA Board of Governors, nor complied
with the provisions of Security Council resolution 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006) and
1747 (2007) and which are essential to build confidence, and deploring Iran’s refusal to take these steps,Noting with concern that Iran has taken issue with the IAEA’s right to verify design information which had been provided by Iran pursuant to the modified
Code 3.1, emphasizing that in accordance with Article 39 of Iran’s Safeguards
Agreement Code 3.1 cannot be modified nor suspended unilaterally and that the
Agency’s right to verify design information provided to it is a continuing right,
From one of your own articles:
"Traces of highly enriched uranium were, indeed, found at the nuclear site at Natanz. It could indicate that they had already enriched uranium," Fleming says. "But it could also indicate that the [explanation] the Iranians gave was correct -- that the [equipment] they imported from abroad had been contaminated at another nuclear site. So we don't really know right now what the origin of these traces of highly enriched uranium is.0 -
_outlaw wrote:what the hell are you talking about. the IAEA has been given a tremendous amount of cooperation by the Iranians - MORE THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY. If they aren't satisfied from Iran's cooperation, then they are SURELY not satisfied from virtually every country in the world.
this is getting ridiculous. I quoted what ElBaradei said. not me. ElBaradei is not satisfied with Iran's cooperation. try to grasp that concept._outlaw wrote:this is a UN security resolution, what the hell is your point. this proves nothing.
I bolded my point. I'll do it again since you seem to be struggling with this discussion...
Iran has not established full and
sustained suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing activities and heavy
water-related projects_outlaw wrote:From one of your own articles:
"Traces of highly enriched uranium were, indeed, found at the nuclear site at Natanz. It could indicate that they had already enriched uranium," Fleming says. "But it could also indicate that the [explanation] the Iranians gave was correct -- that the [equipment] they imported from abroad had been contaminated at another nuclear site. So we don't really know right now what the origin of these traces of highly enriched uranium is.
wow, are you just said my post proves nothing? what exactly does this prove? I'll tell you..... that there is uncertainty in where the enriched uranium is coming from.0 -
spyguy wrote:right, this is what I was getting at. outlaw might chime in soon and say Israel has no fucking right to do anything but hey thats cool
I truly hope it never comes to military action.
I too hope this issue can be resolved diplomatically, but it seems that the hawks in our government and the Israeli government don't have strong diplomacy skills. I understand that you can't show signs of weakness when dealing with this situation but this macho saber rattling from both sides is just pitiful and will get us no where.
Also Israel can't go it alone. If they do decide to take matters into their own hands it will be an utter diseaster. They do not have the bomber capabilities to effectively neutralize Iran's nuclear plants. They would need our support in that aspect. So unilateral action by Israel will only enrage the Iranians without actually dismantling their nuclear program."When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul0 -
you dont think Israel has the bomber capabilities to hit nuke sites? they did it to Iraq and just recently, Syria.
its my gut feeling that no one wants military action. no one is willing to back down though with their words. the good news, Iran has been cooperating to a certain extent with the IAEA. not 100% but talks are ongoing.0 -
spyguy wrote:you dont think Israel has the bomber capabilities to hit nuke sites? they did it to Iraq and just recently, Syria.
its my gut feeling that no one wants military action. no one is willing to back down though with their words. the good news, Iran has been cooperating to a certain extent with the IAEA. not 100% but talks are ongoing.
From what I read Israel does not have long range bombers, which would be essential in hitting Iran's facilities."When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul0 -
mammasan wrote:From what I read Israel does not have long range bombers, which would be essential in hitting Iran's facilities.
hmmm Iran is not that far away at all. but I'm no expert, you could certainly be right. either way, there is no way the US would agree to come in and start bombing at the request of Israel0 -
spyguy wrote:hmmm Iran is not that far away at all. but I'm no expert, you could certainly be right. either way, there is no way the US would agree to come in and start bombing at the request of Israel
As discussed earlier in the thread, Israel probably does have the capability. This isn't 1950, nobody except Russia flies long-range bombers anymore. Fighter-bombers like the F-15 can hit targets at long range and with a heavy payload ... They may or may not need in-flight refueling support to reach Iran. Israeli still may require U.S. support, in terms of permission to cross Iraqi airspace.0 -
spyguy wrote:wow, are you just said my post proves nothing? what exactly does this prove? I'll tell you..... that there is uncertainty in where the enriched uranium is coming from.
you are SO ridiculous.
1. This 3% shit, that you are calling Roland out as a liar or whatever:
It IS common knowledge to ANYONE who has done ANY research on this issue that 3% (or 3 to 5%) is the average rate of enrichment for non-weapons uranium -- ie. POWER GENERATION.
Like he said.
Look it the fuck up.
We did our homework.
The least you could do, is do yours.
But here, since it seems you can't, won't or just don't want to:
From the LATEST IAEA Report on Iran ... which was Feb 08 (page 7):IAEA wrote:B. Current Enrichment Related Activities
43. On 12 December 2007, the first physical inventory taking was carried out at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) in Natanz and verified by the Agency. Since the beginning of operations in February 2007, a total of 1670 kg of UF6 had been fed into the cascades. The operator presented, inter alia, about 75 kg of UF6 as the product, with a stated enrichment of 3.8% U-235. The throughput of the facility has been well below its declared design capacity. There has been no installation of centrifuges outside the original 18-cascade area. Installation work, including equipment and sub-header pipes, is continuing for other cascade areas.
Your obsession with the UN resolutions condeming Iran to stop enrichment are, in the view of those defending Iran's soverignty on this count, fucking ridiculous. Iran is in violation of NO law, has done NOTHING illegal with its enrichment program, and is attempting to continue following down a path towards self subsistent nuclear power generation that it was placed on over 30 years ago with the consent of the United States and the international community!
Since that time it has been NOTHING but lies, deceit, backstabbing, stalling, and backtracking from the US and the international community regarding their support for Iran's ambitions. This has NOTHING to do with any immmediate physical threat coming from Iran, and EVERYTHING to do with the IMPLICATIONS of a 1st world Iran that has achieved internaly sustainable domestic power and therefore becomes a force on the world stage of industrialized nations.
WE DON'T WANT MUSLIM STATES RISING ON THE TOTEM POLE!
That is the SOLE reason for all of this bullshit.
We are just trigger happy for an excuse to bomb the poor arabs back to the stone age. We want what we did to Iraq -- an excuse to come in and bomb away every bridge, water treatment center, flour manufacturer, power generator, radio tower, and civil infrastructure we can think of. Crippling Iran for decades, and coldly murdering several generations of soverign arab muslim citizens.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?0 -
DriftingByTheStorm wrote:you are SO ridiculous.
1. This 3% shit, that you are calling Roland out as a liar or whatever:
It IS common knowledge to ANYONE who has done ANY research on this issue that 3% (or 3 to 5%) is the average rate of enrichment for non-weapons uranium -- ie. POWER GENERATION.
Like he said.
Look it the fuck up.
We did our homework.
The least you could do, is do yours.
But here, since it seems you can't, won't or just don't want to:
From the LATEST IAEA Report on Iran ... which was Feb 08 (page 7):
Your obsession with the UN resolutions condeming Iran to stop enrichment are, in the view of those defending Iran's soverignty on this count, fucking ridiculous. Iran is in violation of NO law, has done NOTHING illegal with its enrichment program, and is attempting to continue following down a path towards self subsistent nuclear power generation that it was placed on over 30 years ago with the consent of the United States and the international community!
Since that time it has been NOTHING but lies, deceit, backstabbing, stalling, and backtracking from the US and the international community regarding their support for Iran's ambitions. This has NOTHING to do with any immmediate physical threat coming from Iran, and EVERYTHING to do with the IMPLICATIONS of a 1st world Iran that has achieved internaly sustainable domestic power and therefore becomes a force on the world stage of industrialized nations.
WE DON'T WANT MUSLIM STATES RISING ON THE TOTEM POLE!
That is the SOLE reason for all of this bullshit.
We are just trigger happy for an excuse to bomb the poor arabs back to the stone age. We want what we did to Iraq -- an excuse to come in and bomb away every bridge, water treatment center, flour manufacturer, power generator, radio tower, and civil infrastructure we can think of. Crippling Iran for decades, and coldly murdering several generations of soverign arab muslim citizens.
jezuz christ. calm the fuck down. I wasnt questioning how much enriched uranium can come from power plants. I was questioning how he knows Iran only has this much. I asked for proof. something he didnt provide, you did. thank you. now go take your zanax you fucking head is going to explode.
from your source..
56. Contrary to the decisions of the Security Council, Iran has not suspended its enrichment related
activities, having continued the operation of PFEP and FEP. In addition, Iran started the development
of new generation centrifuges. Iran has also continued construction of the IR-40 reactor and operation
of the Heavy Water Production Plant.0 -
spyguy wrote:from your source..
56. Contrary to the decisions of the Security Council, Iran has not suspended its enrichment related
activities, having continued the operation of PFEP and FEP. In addition, Iran started the development
of new generation centrifuges. Iran has also continued construction of the IR-40 reactor and operation
of the Heavy Water Production Plant.
Right.
We all know this.
Like those here have been saying ... there is nothing wrong -- legally or morally -- with Iran's quest for peaceable nuclear fuel. The US has utilitzed its heavy influence on the UN Security Council to implement resolutions which violate the basic soverignty of Iran.
If Iran is in compliance with all the IAEAs requests regarding fuel enrichment, and maintains its long set pursuit of peacefull nuclear energy, they are in violation of nothing -- save for your all mighty UN Security Council which is attempting to violate national soverignty for ulterior global geo-political motives.
:cool:If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?0 -
Spyguy wants to bomb him some Iranians...
Oh yeah...git some!Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")0 -
DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
WE DON'T WANT MUSLIM STATES RISING ON THE TOTEM POLE!
That is the SOLE reason for all of this bullshit.
We are just trigger happy for an excuse to bomb the poor arabs back to the stone age. We want what we did to Iraq -- an excuse to come in and bomb away every bridge, water treatment center, flour manufacturer, power generator, radio tower, and civil infrastructure we can think of. Crippling Iran for decades, and coldly murdering several generations of soverign arab muslim citizens.
Now we are talking how soon can we get something like this off the ground. You think if we clog up the Persian gulf with enough boats we can just run into an excuse or is that an act of war.
BIGDVS wants to bomb him some Saudis, Syrians, Egyptians, Iranians, Pakistians and the entire West Bank and Gaza...
"Aloha...git some!" (CK RAMONE, MSG II '08)"The really important thing is not to live, but to live well. And to live well meant, along with more enjoyable things in life, to live according to your principles."
— Socrates0 -
RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:Spyguy wants to bomb him some Iranians...
Oh yeah...git some!
absolutely not. I want two things. to have NO bombs dropped on Iran and for Iran to not have a nuclear weapon.0 -
Srsly though this is not as big of an issue as Israel is making it and I have a feeling the defense department knows it. My opinion and not much in the news to go on about this is I think we are trying to get Iran to flip. Not necessarily to go back to dealing with the US overtly (think more Jordan like, then Suadi Arabia) but at least to stop dealing with North Korea and Russia (and this is helping antagonize the georgia situation). So we are diplomatically holding back the pitbull (israel) but still showing our seriousness about seeing something change (naval blockade maybe).
It would be a simple case of letting them kill themselves and have civil wars with in Islam for the next 500-800 years if they didnt happen to live on top of the damn black gold."The really important thing is not to live, but to live well. And to live well meant, along with more enjoyable things in life, to live according to your principles."
— Socrates0 -
I usually say "no nukes"...
but I can totally sympathize with Iran with all this talk of invasion...
Maybe it's time for others in the region not to sleep well...the Minions0 -
spyguy wrote:absolutely not. I want two things. to have NO bombs dropped on Iran and for Iran to not have a nuclear weapon.
Okay.
Well as far as Iran's part of the deal goes,
they DON'T have a nuclear weapon,
and they are NOT PURSUING a nuclear weapon.
But,
i guess i can understand all the skepticisim though,
since the first country in the region to (ILLEGALY) obtain nukes still claims it does NOT have them ... :cough cough: Israel :cough cough:
So, with that as your precedent, i guess it makes sense to question everything.
Why do the Israelis have to screw up the nuclear party for everyone !?!
:rolleyes:If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?0 -
DriftingByTheStorm wrote:Okay.
Well as far as Iran's part of the deal goes,
they DON'T have a nuclear weapon,
and they are NOT PURSUING a nuclear weapon.
just because you ALL CAP something, doesnt make it true.0 -
Strangest Tribe wrote:I usually say "no nukes"...
but I can totally sympathize with Iran with all this talk of invasion...
Maybe it's time for others in the region not to sleep well...
besides Israel?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 278 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help