babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » The US-Iran War, Step 3: Iran Hints At Leaving Non-Proliferation Treaty

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: The US-Iran War, Step 3: Iran Hints At Leaving Non-Proliferation Treaty
drgoodword
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3214

posted 25 April 2006 10:35 AM      Profile for drgoodword   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
STEP 1: Iran signs an oil deal with China worth $100 Billion and a nuclear deal with Russia, locking arms with the big boys of the region.

STEP 2: U.S. President Bush declares a nuclear Iran "unacceptable" and the U.S. military begins to make plans for war on Iran.

STEP 3: Iran ups the ante considerably by threatening to walk away from the Non-proliferation Treaty:

quote:
TEHRAN, Iran - AP - Aprl 25, 2006 - Iran's hard-line president said Monday that he is thinking about withdrawing from the nuclear nonproliferation treaty if the U.N. atomic agency tries to prevent his country from enriching uranium.

In a rare news conference with foreign journalists, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also predicted the U.N. Security Council will not impose sanctions on Iran, which is facing a Friday deadline to halt enrichment because of suspicions it is trying to develop atomic weapons.

Ahmadinejad's government insists the nonproliferation treaty gives Iran the right to enrich uranium for fueling civilian nuclear power plants, and he has given no ground in the international face-off.



From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
BlueBerry Pick'n
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11382

posted 25 April 2006 01:56 PM      Profile for BlueBerry Pick'n   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
STEP 4: Bush upps ante by scheduling pseudo-nuclear 'bunker buster' test for 2.Jun.06. in Nevada.
...an explosive so large that its ONLY test utility is to simulate a nuclear strike.

why? because the conventional explosives to be used are 700+ tons & TOO BLOODY HEAVY to move. so big, SCIENTISTS have publically protested & issued petitions DEMANDING this be cancelled.

Name of Test: *DIVINE STRAKE*.

Location: Nevada, site named DIVINE HATE.
no shit: this is for freaking REAL

but more creepy, more disturbed than that, it happens just before the media hyp'd 6.June.06... movies are scheduled for release... (The Omen), and they're releasing the heavily publicized & probably completely fictional 'Flight 84" or whatever the number was of the plane that was ostensibly brought down by the fellow passengers on 9/11.

propaganda, demented SCHEDULING...

oh too freaking creepy for words... the rhetoric, the claims that an invasion of Iran will lower the artificially raised oil prices...

oh this is going to be a bad Summer, in the meantime, ... gee, ya THINK???

but prices will be lower when CanadianALLY helps out, right??

Oh yes, I forgot:

Halliburton is the ONLY company to make Tamifu &
The Boston Globe has announced
security companies are demanding employees be CHIPPED for identification purposes...

have a good Summer!
BlueBerry Pick'n
can be found @
ThisCanadian.com
"Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"

[ 25 April 2006: Message edited by: BlueBerry Pick'n ]

[ 25 April 2006: Message edited by: BlueBerry Pick'n ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fear-ah
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6476

posted 25 April 2006 02:37 PM      Profile for Fear-ah        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by drgoodword:
STEP 1: Iran signs an oil deal with China worth $100 Billion and a nuclear deal with Russia, locking arms with the big boys of the region.

Where is the PNAC step?

Where was the 'axis of evil' step?

Where was the John Bolton 'recess' appointment?

Where is India and Pakistan in the list?

Where is the Iranian Bourse step?

Hate to think anyone is missing some of the 'baby steps' in all this and that the US has been targeting the Middle East for decades--in fact the Carter Doctrine was invented because of the threat Iran posed to American oil interests.

Also why would Iran signing trade deals with Russia or China be sinister? We have trade deals with these country? Are we locking arms?

um--and Iran 'walking away from the non-poliferation treaty' is a complete fabrication of Iran's position.
It is in fact the US that is trying to get the Secruity Council to impose sanctions on Iran, none of which has even the support of the Europeans at this time, let alone, China or Russia.
Iran has said that it would leave the Treaty IF sanctions were imposed.

[ 25 April 2006: Message edited by: Fear-ah ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
billF
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12284

posted 10 May 2006 10:36 AM      Profile for billF     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Not even that worried about it, US, Iran, War I mean. The Bush Administration and Tony Blair’s party is heavily embattled at home and both are loosing support domestically.

Internationally, the US has zero credibility and are doing a fine job of isolating themselves politically while they become less important economically. Koffi Anan has set them up to take the fall when they fail to talk directly with Iran. They will fail to get the language they want in the UN Security Council resolution, if there’s a resolution at all. They have little or no support on the Iranian issue in the General Assembly.

As to the big bomb on June 2nd. Well, they must be planning a smallish nuke if the test blast is only 700 tons. They did post bids to have small tactical field nukes made, but didn’t file with the IAEA to reduce nuclear capability in other arias as required under the NPT. And that my friends, is a CLEAR violation of the treaty by the US. Looks to me like the Pot’s calling the Kettle black.

I do suspect Iran is planning to build smallish nukes, but feel they want a deterrent weapon. Nuclear Pakistan and Iran are not close, western forces are all over Afghanistan, US forces are in Iraq causing or allowing general mayhem. I can’t even fault them ….

Later, eh ….


From: Thunder Bay ON CAN. | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 01 June 2006 04:27 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I really don't understand how the US and European nuclear-armed countries figure think that they can tell Iran in any way that will be acceptable to them, that they can't have nuclear power or weapons. I really don't understand that. How do they get the nerve, or the gall?

How can they claim to negotiate in good faith with a country when their main negotiating point is, "We think you're too crazy and irrational to have nukes"? What the hell do they THINK Iran is going to say to that? If anyone said that to the US, the US would tell them to go to hell.

Anyhow...shockingly enough, Iran is cool to conditions on nuclear talks.

quote:
The United States and international partners are close to a deal that would offer Iran economic incentives if it suspends nuclear activities that could produce a bomb, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says.

Iran's foreign minister welcomed the idea of direct talks, but rebuffed the U.S. condition that Tehran first must suspend uranium enrichment.

“Iran welcomes dialogue under just conditions but (we) won't give up our (nuclear) rights,” the state-run Iranian television quoted Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki as saying Thursday.


Gee, I can't understand that! Besides, Iran has the best reason of all to develop nuclear weapons - so that the US will leave them the fuck alone, the way they now do with Pakistan and North Korea.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 01 June 2006 09:25 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The failure of the talks with the European community and Iran had much to do with the simple fact that Iran was willing to drop enrichment in exchange for security guarantees (i.e. the US would not attack them) and the US refused to provide any such guarantees.

And keep in mind while the US has walked away from and violated any number of international agreements, including the NPT, the Iranians have upheld all of theirs, yet the Iranians are the bad guys ... go figure.


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 01 June 2006 10:45 AM      Profile for ceti     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The reason there is such a propaganda campaign against Iran these days (not just with the National Post, but also other Western publications even those from Europe) is that Iran is being assertive. As a nation, it is standing up for itself, knowing full well that the mess in neighbouring Iraq and Afghanistan awaits them if they back down.

The Israel angle is there too. Rather than staying quiet during the Iraq debacle, Israeli politicians have actually called for the US to take a tough line against Iran. This is very dangerous game and needs to be diffused fast.


From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 01 June 2006 11:04 AM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[QB]I really don't understand how the US and European nuclear-armed countries figure think that they can tell Iran in any way that will be acceptable to them, that they can't have nuclear power or weapons. I really don't understand that. How do they get the nerve, or the gall?
QB]

Post colonial mentality that hasn't completely gone away, and a racial based superiority complex would top my list as to the reasons why. Other factors pushing this arrogant agenda would have to include the all powerful special interests, especially in the US, that set the agenda from the shadows. We saw them front and center for awhile while the Iraq war was the popular thing to do, but now they have crawled back to operate under the rocks. They consider Iran and it's people to be threats. Any country that cannot be controlled financially is an anomoly and therefore a threat. No major news media outlet has had the courtesy of informing its viewers/readers that Iran has every right under the Nuclear NPT to develop a domestic energy program, including internationally verified domestic enrichment to the quality necessary to produce electricity. If the media is not in sync with the special interests, then why are they not calling the respective governments to account as to why they do not want Iran to have what is rightfully theirs under international treaty. It is because most mainstream media is privately owned. It is not honest public information that that we hear, but interest based propaganda. Case in point, can anyone doubt that the media in the US was largely responsible for the massive US popular support for the war in Iraq. In my mind anyway, they are also partly responsible for every innocent Iraqi death.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 01 June 2006 11:40 AM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The most ironic part is that the US would almost certainly lose a war with Iran, lose what little they have of Iraq in the process, and very possibly lose Afghanistan. Iran has a large army and a very large population, and could do a lot of damage to the glaringly weakened US military. The have the ability to sink most of the ships in the Gulf, for starters.

Pakistan would erupt, and the fundies would take power, with its nukes. India would freak out if Pakistan was run by fundies, and possibly end up with a fundie government of their own.

Saudi Arabia could very well collapse, and the US would be so pinned down they couldn't do anything about it.

Central Asia would fall apart, and Russia and China would move right into the gap created by the crumbling of US power.

This is obvious to anyone who looks at what's happening over there. It seems that the fundamental problem the US currently has is rooted in hubris. They are convinced that they cannot be beaten, which is a story that never ends well.

I think the historical comparisons of Bush with Hitler are well off the mark. The Kaiser is a better example. Simpleton with a big army who thinks he can't be beaten, and will kill millions in the process of finding out he's wrong.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
obscurantist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8238

posted 01 June 2006 03:01 PM      Profile for obscurantist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wow -- when you put it that way, arborman, a US-Iran war almost sounds like a good thing. In the long term, that is.

In the short term, it would see many countries led by even nastier regimes than the ones currently in power, it would result in economic chaos here in North America, and it would spark a series of conflicts that could quite possibly include large-scale terrorist attacks.

But in the long term, it might precipitate the fall of the American empire. As you say, that would be small comfort to the many victims of such an idiotic adventure.


From: an unweeded garden | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 01 June 2006 08:55 PM      Profile for ceti     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Bush as Kaiser, or rather, a wannabe Caesar (more like Commodus, than Julius) -- that's about right.

The whole thing needs to be nipped in the bud before the hawks in the Bush Administration use it to distract from their currently abysmal popularity.


From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 08 June 2006 04:28 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday Iran is ready to discuss “mutual concerns” over its nuclear program and claimed the West had given in to the will of the Iranian nation.

Mr. Ahmadinejad did not say whether Iran accepted a Western proposal for resuming negotiations that demands Tehran suspend uranium enrichment in return for a package of incentives .

“On behalf of the Iranian nation, I'm announcing that the Iranian nation will never hold negotiations about its definite rights with anybody, but we are for talks about mutual concerns to resolve misunderstandings in the international arena,” Mr. Ahmadinejad told thousands of people in Qazvin, west of the capital Tehran.


President says Iran ready for nuclear talks


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Village Idiot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6274

posted 09 June 2006 08:47 AM      Profile for Village Idiot   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

President says Iran ready for nuclear talks


I really wonder how the US will attempt to spin the word "inalienable" - as in:

"...inalienable right to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination."

(Article IV.1 - NNPT - 1970)

Interesting that in order to enforce a resolution through UNSC, the UN Charter, as well as the NNPT would have to be violated IN LAW, as well as in principle...

More interesting is that I cannot, for the life of me, remember when the USA opposed any other country's nuclear ambitions (India, Pakistan, North Korea, anyone?) - even when they resulted in the acquisition of nuclear arms...

It's all about access to and control of:
OILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOILOIL.


From: Undisclosed Location | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca