Iran warned over nuclear demands

DuH2 · #1 (**permalink**) 02-10-2007, 02:17 AM

Quote:

German chancellor Angela Merkel has told a global security forum that the international community is determined to stop Iran getting nuclear weapons.

She said there was "no way around" the need for Tehran to accept demands from the UN and nuclear watchdog, the IAEA.

Quote:

What we are talking about here is a very, very sensitive technology, and for that reason we need a high degree of transparency, which Iran has failed to provide, and if Iran does not do so then the alternative for Iran is to slip further into isolation," Mrs Merkel said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6349287.stm

Irans going to stop or be stopped.

Democrat-Yan86 · #2 (**permalink**) 02-10-2007, 02:32 AM

Be stopped by who? Russia is still going to help them in some way or another, and China is not going to embargo Iran, they need the oil in the future. Where's the proof that Iran is making nukes... If that proof is coming from the Whitehouse I'm gonna laugh.

sputterman · #3 (**permalink**) 02-10-2007, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuH2";p=&quot

Quote:

German chancellor Angela Merkel has told a global security forum that the international community is determined to stop Iran getting nuclear weapons.

She said there was "no way around" the need for Tehran to accept demands from the UN and nuclear watchdog, the IAEA.

Quote:

What we are talking about here is a very, very sensitive technology, and for that reason we need a high degree of transparency, which Iran has failed to provide, and if Iran does not do so then the alternative for Iran is to slip further into isolation," Mrs Merkel said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6349287.stm

Irans going to stop or be stopped.

justabubba · #4 (**permalink**) 02-10-2007, 03:49 AM

first merkel

Quote:

She said there was "no way around" the need for Tehran to accept demands from the UN and nuclear watchdog, the IAEA.

What we are talking about here is a very, very sensitive technology, and for that reason we need a high degree of transparency, which Iran has failed to provide, and if Iran does not do so then the alternative for Iran is to slip further into isolation," Mrs Merkel said.

then duh chimes in with his insightful prediction:

Quote:

Irans going to stop or be stopped.

[sarcasm] how are we all not convinced iran will now roll over and play dead [/sarcasm]

DuH2 · #5 (**permalink**) 02-10-2007, 02:22 PM

I am fully aware that you guys prefer anti-US terrorist states and their goals. Thats been made obvious time and time agian. Isn't a single terrorist group you guys will actually fight anywhere on the face of the planet.

All this is is a further news story of a process thats been going for years. Its but the newest comments on Iran for the Germans and it falls in line with the French British and Americans.

The EU and USA is making it absolutely clear that Iran gettig nukes is unacceptable.
Israel has made it absolutely clear Iran is stopped or they will stop tem.
IOW Iran is going to stop or be stopped.

"Why are we invading Iraq when the REAL ENEMY is IRAN and North Korea?"

SO much for that lie.

"The REAL ENEMY is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA."

Too honest...?

Wildbore · #6 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 05:34 AM

I agree that military options should be on the table, and not removed until there is proof of Iran's complaince.

I can't find a link but I think Iran was going to comply with UN resolutions by placing cameras in their underground facilities. I heard this on either BBC or CBC. Hopefully this is true because it would be a relief to the world to find out what Iran is doing.

ashleykennedy · #7 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

I agree that military options should be on the table, and not removed until there is proof of Iran's complaince.

I can't find a link but I think Iran was going to comply with UN resolutions by placing cameras in their underground facilities. I heard this on either BBC or CBC. Hopefully this is true because it would be a relief to the world to find out what Iran is doing.

Does the US have the military capability for use against Iran. Yes the US could bomb Iran but what affect would that have in Iraq? Could the US invade Iran, I doubt it?

The IAEA has cameras inside the Natanz facility. The cameras are immaterial as it is what Iran proposes to do with the enriched uranium that is important. Is it for electric production or bombs. Has Iran resurected the US plan to build 23 Nuclear power station or is Iran a threat to stability in the ME? Not that there is stability in the ME at the moment.

Iran is still a long way off having a capability to make a bomb. For the moment the military option is a waste of time.

sputterman · #8 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuH2";p=&quot

I am fully aware that you guys prefer anti-US terrorist states and their goals. Thats been made obvious time and time agian. Isn't a single terrorist group you guys will actually fight anywhere on the face of the planet.

All this is is a further news story of a process thats been going for years. Its but the newest comments on Iran for the Germans and it falls in line with the French British and Americans.

The EU and USA is making it absolutely clear that Iran gettig nukes is unacceptable.
Israel has made it absolutely clear Iran is stopped or they will stop tem.
IOW Iran is going to stop or be stopped.

"Why are we invading Iraq when the REAL ENEMY is IRAN and North Korea?"

SO much for that lie.

"The REAL ENEMY is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA."

Too honest...?

is that all anti-American terrorism derives from American terrorism. America ceased being the good guys a long, long time ago. Long before you were born. You are just spewing the propaganda we learned in school.

Wildbore · #9 (**permalink**) 02-12-2007, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

I agree that military options should be on the table, and not removed until there is proof of Iran's complaince.

I can't find a link but I think Iran was going to comply with UN resolutions by placing cameras in their underground facilities. I heard this on either BBC or CBC. Hopefully this is true because it would be a relief to the world to find out what Iran is doing.

Does the US have the military capability for use against Iran. Yes the US could bomb Iran but what affect would that have in Iraq? Could the US invade Iran, I doubt it?

The IAEA has cameras inside the Natanz facility. The cameras are immaterial as it is what Iran proposes to do with the enriched uranium that is important. Is it for electric production or bombs. Has Iran resurected the US plan to build 23 Nuclear power station or is Iran a threat to stability in the ME? Not that there is stability in the ME at the moment.

Iran is still a long way off having a capability to make a bomb. For the moment the military option is a waste of time.

Keeping the military option on the table has the potential of saving time later on.

I think it would be stupid to bomb Iran in the near future myself, but policy makers must have all options prepared just in the case something unfortunate transpires.

Sleepy · #10 (**permalink**) 02-12-2007, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Democrat-Yan86";p=&quot

Be stopped by who? Russia is still going to help them in some way or another, and China is not going to embargo Iran, they need the oil in the future. Where's the proof that Iran is making nukes... If that proof is coming from the Whitehouse I'm gonna laugh.

GUILIANI

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode