US to present Iran with 30-day ultimatum

[Flavius22]

The United States will present a 30-day ultimatum to the UN Security Council this week, the Washington Post reported Saturday, calling on Iran to cease with its nuclear program.

It was reported however, that the US would not request further economic sanctions on Iran.

Iran and the European Union inched toward a compromise Friday that diplomats said would allow Tehran to run a scaled-down version of a uranium enrichment program with potential for misuse to develop atomic weapons.

The development was significant because the Europeans and the United States have for years opposed allowing Iran any kind of enrichment capability - a stance that Russia, China and other influential nations have embraced in recent months.

Top European officials - including the foreign ministers of France and Germany - publicly described talks Friday in Vienna as failing because of Tehran's refusal to reimpose a freeze on enrichment.

"Unfortunately we were not able to reach an agreement," French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told reporters. He said the EU continues to demand "full and complete suspension" of uranium enrichment and related activities that have fed fears that Iran may be pursuing nuclear arms.

Germany's Frank-Walter Steinmeier said the meeting ended, after just over two hours, "without achieving a result."

But diplomats familiar with the talks told The Associated Press that after months of deadlock, the two sides explored possible agreement by discussing plans that essentially would allow Iran small-scale enrichment after reimposing its freeze for an undefined period.

The compromise would serve Iran, the European Union and Russia by allowing all of them to say they had achieved their main goals.

Iran would be able to run a program it insists it has a right to under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if it is only on a research basis instead of the full-scale enrichment.

The Europeans, who since 2004 have negotiated for Iran to scrap enrichment, could tolerate small-scale enrichment if Iran first agrees to their key demand - a freeze to re-establish confidence.

Moscow could benefit diplomatically and economically if Iran accepts its plan to move its enrichment program to Russia - except for activities defined as research and development that all sides agree on under any compromise plan.

One of the diplomats - who demanded anonymity in exchange for divulging the substance of the confidential discussion - said the impetus came from Moscow, which has taken the lead in talking to Iran since talks with the Europeans collapsed late last year.

He said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was to float the compromise plan in Washington on Monday and Tuesday to gauge American reaction.

Consensus on such a compromise by the Russians, Europeans and Iranians could leave the Americans with two unpalatable choices.

If Washington accepts the plan, it essentially leaves Iran in a position to develop technology that it could use to make fissile uranium for warheads.

If it refuses, it again could face diplomatic near-isolation on what to do about Iran after months of building the kind of international consensus that last month led the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board to put the UN Security Council on alert about Iran's suspect nuclear program.

By depriving the Iranians of domestic control of enrichment, the Russian plan - backed by most in the international community including the US and the Europeans - is meant to eliminate the danger that Tehran might misuse it to make the fissile core of nuclear warheads.


Small-scale enrichment under a compromise would deprive Iran of the chance to run the thousands of centrifuges needed to enrich in sufficient amounts to give them material for multiple weapons. But it would allow them to perfect the methodology, should they later decide to start industrial-scale enrichment.

Iran restarted some enrichment activities last month, two years after voluntarily freezing the program during talks with the Europeans. Those talks unraveled late last year.

A report last week by IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei showed Iran testing centrifuges - machines that spin uranium gas into enriched uranium.

And just a few months down the road, "commencement of the installation of the first 3,000 ... (centrifuges) is planned for the fourth quarter of 2006," the report said.

Experts estimate that Iran already has enough black-market components in storage to build the 1,500 operating centrifuges it would need to make the 20 kilograms (45 pounds) of highly enriched uranium needed for one crude weapon.

Tehran insists it wants enrichment only to generate electricity and that it does not seek nuclear arms, but a growing number of nations share US fears that that is not the case.

While Russia backed alerting the Security Council to Iran, it remains reluctant to press for tough action against Tehran, an economic and strategic partner. Lavrov said Friday that permanent council members were not united on a course of action.

"There is no collectively discussed and agreed strategy of what we all will be doing in the Security Council if the issue is there," Lavrov told foreign reporters, hinting at his country's opposition to increasing pressure on Tehran.

The IAEA's board is to discuss the Iran issue at a meeting beginning Monday, including the ElBaradei report. The board notified the UN Security Council Feb. 4, after Iran refused to heed requests to maintain a suspension on enrichment.

There had been little hope the Vienna meeting would achieve a breakthrough. Both sides had made clear before that they would not move from their positions; the Europeans demanded Tehran freeze all enrichment activities and Iran insisted it would not.

A Russian nuclear agency official, who spoke Thursday on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to media, confirmed the Moscow talks remained snagged over the same issue - Iran's refusal to freeze enrichment at home.

Still, Lavrov hinted at the chances of compromise detailed to the AP, saying Friday that a deal with Iran was still possible before the IAEA meeting.

"There always is an opportunity to reach an agreement," the Interfax news agency quoted Lavrov as saying in Moscow.

In Vienna, ElBaradei said he was "hopeful" of a negotiated solution after meeting with Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani, while the Iranian representative to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, described the talks with the Europeans as "fruitful."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=2&cid=1139395531778&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[signatory]

Pasting the original article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/03/AR2006030300266.html?sub=AR

U.S. Seeks Deadline in Dispute With Iran

By Dafna Linzer and Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, March 4, 2006; Page A14

NEW YORK, March 3 -- The Bush administration, preparing to take Iran's case to the U.N. Security Council as early as next week, is seeking a 30-day deadline for Tehran to halt its nuclear program and cooperate with international inspectors or face severe diplomatic pressures, according to several senior U.S. and European officials.

But the officials, who discussed the details of the diplomatic strategy on the condition of anonymity, said they expected tough negotiations among the Security Council's 15 members and said much hinges on Russia.

Russian officials have spent the past several weeks trying to persuade the Islamic republic to freeze much of its nuclear infrastructure and transfer the most sensitive aspects to Russia. Iran has expressed interest in a joint uranium-enrichment venture with Moscow but also wants to enrich uranium at home, which it says would be used for an energy program. Iran's chief negotiator, Ali Larijani, reiterated that position to senior European officials Friday in Vienna.

The Bush administration asserts that Iran's nuclear energy program is a cover for bomb-making. A three-year investigation by inspectors with the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency has not found proof of an Iranian nuclear weapons effort. But the agency also cannot determine whether Iran's nuclear program is strictly for peaceful purposes.

For years Washington was alone in its desire to push the issue of Iran's program to the U.N. Security Council. And on Monday, members of the IAEA board will meet in Vienna to discuss the agency's latest findings and formally hand the issue off to the Security Council, where the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France have more influence and can raise the possibility of imposing sanctions.

Going to the council represents the second time in four years that the Bush administration has tried to persuade the U.N. to pressure a Muslim country accused of hiding a weapons program. Wary of the comparisons to Iraq, where no weapons of mass destruction were found, the White House is hoping a combination of diplomacy, U.N. inspections and negotiations will succeed in pressuring Iran. At the same time, Washington hopes to ease the concerns of allies suspicious of U.S. intentions.

U.S. and European officials, who have claimed international consensus on the Iran issue, hope the matter could be taken up by the council by the end of next week. But it is clear that stark differences remain among council members.

U.S. diplomats have prepared a draft statement for adoption by the council, noting the IAEA's latest findings. Diplomats said the U.S. draft gives Iran 30 days to suspend its nuclear activities and cooperate with inspectors or face the possibility of tougher diplomatic action. U.S. and European officials have been discussing a number of measures inside and outside the council's purview, such as travel bans on Iranian officials, economic sanctions or an oil embargo.

"The idea is to begin slowly, with a presidential statement, set timetables and then give Iran a certain deadline to respond," one senior U.S. official said. "After that we push harder with a resolution."

But Russian officials, unwilling to give up on talks with the Iranians, which have not yet yielded results, are unlikely to go for such a tough start.

"There is no collectively discussed and agreed strategy of what we all will be doing in the Security Council if the issue is there," Russian Foreign Minster Sergei Lavrov told reporters Friday in Moscow. Lavrov will visit Washington on Tuesday for talks with President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Bush administration officials said they expect to get a sense then about how far Russia is prepared to go in pressuring Iran, which has been a close economic partner for Moscow. Russian officials are currently suggesting giving the Iranians anywhere from 60 days to three months to continue negotiations and respond to additional concerns from the IAEA, diplomats said.

For Washington, ensuring the issue remains on the council's agenda is key. John R. Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was charged "to make sure this stays in the council," something Russia and China would like to avoid, a U.S. official said.

U.S. diplomats conferred with French, British, Russian and Chinese officials Thursday and Friday in New York to discuss Iran.

Some Iran and U.N. experts believe it is unlikely the council will agree to impose economic sanctions even if Iran continues to defy calls by the IAEA board to freeze parts of its energy program.

China blocked Security Council action against North Korea, which the IAEA referred to the council in 2003 after Pyongyang withdrew from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This time, Russia and China have said they are committed to seeing Iran freeze its nuclear enrichment activities to assure the international community it has no intention of pursuing a nuclear weapon. But they both firmly oppose punitive measures to compel Iran to do so and favor letting the IAEA handle the crisis.

"You have this basic split between the United States, Britain and France, who want the issue in the council, versus the Russians and Chinese, who for slightly different reasons would like to keep the issue in Vienna as long as possible," said Flynt L. Leverett of the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy.

Noting commercial and political interests, Leverett said that "for an energy hungry country like China, having a privileged relationship with a big oil supplier like Iran is a big deal."

[Aerosoul]

and now the centrifuges begin to turn.....to put it metaphorically.

[tyovan]

or an oil embargo.

Will the American people put up with that though? The people here bitch whenever the cost of gas goes up by a few pennies. An oil embargo against Iran would cause the cost to rise by a few dollars.

[usa320]

Will the American people put up with that though? The people here bitch whenever the cost of gas goes up by a few pennies. An oil embargo against Iran would cause the cost to rise by a few dollars.


guess again. The US doesnt import oil from Iran.

World oil export leaders and their reliance on the U.S. consumer market
(numbers are in million barrels per day, data from EIA)
Country / Net Oil Exports / U.S. Imports / Reliance on U.S. Market
Saudi Arabia 8.7 1.27 15%
Russia 6.6 0.047 <1%
Norway 2.9 0.1 3%
Iran 2.5 0 0%
Venezuela 2.3 1.01 44%
UAE 2.3 0.021 <1%
Kuwait 2.2 0.27 12%
Nigeria 2.1 1.16 55%
Mexico 1.8 1.66 92%
Canada 1.8 1.8 99+%
Algeria 1.6 0.26 16%
Iraq 1.4 0.57 41%
Libya 1.3 0.051 4%
Kazakhstan 1.0 0 0%
Qatar 1.0 0 0%


Iran is one of the top 5 of the world's oil producers, however the US does not import Oil, or for that matter, much of anything at all, from Iran. So an embargo on their oil shipments would hurt them VERY hard and hurt us barely at all.

If Iran was persuing nuclear research for peaceful purposes, it would have accepted the Russian's plan.

[Telnyashka]

Poor decision to strike Iran right now...An invasion impossible for sure, surgical strikes yes possible. But then Iran would win by simply spouting more propaganda and how USA is trying to destroy Islam...

There has been no evidence of an Iranian nuclear program, and I see nothing wrong with a civilian nuclear program.

[LaoSexMachine]

[quote=Telnyashka]There has been no evidence of an Iranian nuclear program, quote]


They have a nuke program.

[usa320]

Poor decision to strike Iran right now...An invasion impossible for sure, surgical strikes yes possible. But then Iran would win by simply spouting more propaganda and how USA is trying to destroy Islam...

There has been no evidence of an Iranian nuclear program, and I see nothing wrong with a civilian nuclear program.


are you living in a box without a TV or radio, or even a newspaper from a year or two ago? There is a *censored**censored**censored**censored*load of evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear program...none the least of which is their own admission on a few occasions. If Iran spouted propaganda the only thing they would "win" would be the minds of the same nutters that already support them.

An invasion isnt Impossible...it would be unwise, it would be difficult, but if the US used every single soldier and weapon at its disposal it would be more that possible.

But i think Airstrikes against Iran would not only be a good decision, but i think they are inevitable.

[Telnyashka]

Other than CNN and other media speculation that because Iran is a dictatorship it would have Nuclear Weapons. Is there any actual evidence other than this? If so please point it in my direction.


An invasion isnt Impossible...it would be unwise, it would be difficult, but if the US used every single soldier and weapon at its disposal it would be more that possible.

Well if USA had 20 million soldiers it could conquer the world. The point is that currently it is impossible because USA does NOT have "every single soldier and weapon at its disposal".

EDIT: Apologies, I meant a Nuclear WEAPON program. Not civilian program. I am very well aware of their attempt at Nuclear energy, but what I am referring to is Nukes as in Nuclear Weapons

[usa320]

Other than CNN and other media speculation that because Iran is a dictatorship it would have Nuclear Weapons. Is there any actual evidence other than this? If so please point it in my direction.



Gee Wizz, maybe the underground bunkers and SAM sites that surround the plant at Estfahan...

Not to mention their constant threats to "nuke the jews", "wipe the yankees of the face of the earth" and turn iraq into a "sea of fire..."...

[Telnyashka]

Gee Wizz, maybe the underground bunkers and SAM sites that surround the plant at Estfahan...

SAM sites are now considered Nuclear Weapons? And they have had underground bunkers since before the time of Nuclear Weapons.

Again, I want to see evidence of a Nuclear weapons program other than "WELL DUH OFCOURSE THEY HAVE IT!".

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Nah the Iranians are chill, good people with a good leader you got to hand it to the bloke he has a wry sense of humour and like our beloved leader Tony and the US leader Mr Bush he seeks the guidance of God before any major decision.

[Telnyashka]

Nah the Iranians are chill, good people with a good leader you got to hand it to the bloke he has a wry sense of humour and like our beloved leader Tony and the US leader Mr Bush he seeks the guidance of God before any major decision.

All I am hearing is jokes and speculation. How about evidence?

Wasnt Saddam a brutal dictator, and wasnt the case against him a slam dunk one?

[usa320]

SAM sites are now considered Nuclear Weapons? And they have had underground bunkers since before the time of Nuclear Weapons.

Again, I want to see evidence of a Nuclear weapons program other than "WELL DUH OFCOURSE THEY HAVE IT!".


jesus, you think that intelligence documents and photos are just floating around the internet for me to pull out my ass freely?

you do not build mile long tunnels into mountainsides next to a nuclear plant unless you are trying to hide something from aerial reconnaisance, and you dont ring places with SAM sites unless you are protecting something.

[StealthMode]

I the the satelitte photography of 10 to 100's of nuclear sites eludes to the fact that Iran's nuclear infrastructure is enourmous.

Also, evidence regarding Irans's active seeking for WMD information has been proven. I think the mass media has largely missed and avoided most of the subtle intelligence that has been gathered (which seems quite potent)

There was an article awhile back regarind the number of sites determined to destroy Iran's nuclear infrastructure and it was in the several hundreds.

I see no land attack attempts by the US in striking Iran, this is bombs and tomahawks.... hopefully the Iraq border can be defended well enough against angry barbarians looking for payback in Iraq, and Israel's Arrows can knock down the Shihab....

The only alternative is to watch Iran do what NK did.... "Ok, we have a bomb, we admit it". Watch how the world shy's away then and lets Iran do whatever it wants more than now.

[usa320]

All I am hearing is jokes and speculation. How about evidence?

Wasnt Saddam a brutal dictator, and wasnt the case against him a slam dunk one?


yeah, he was a brutal dictator, and there is a slam dunk case against him, which hes going to be hanged for sooner or later.

[BarkingSquirrel]

SAM sites are now considered Nuclear Weapons? And they have had underground bunkers since before the time of Nuclear Weapons.

Again, I want to see evidence of a Nuclear weapons program other than "WELL DUH OFCOURSE THEY HAVE IT!".You don't use SAMs and bunkers to protect camels and extra towels.

[Telnyashka]

You don't use SAMs and bunkers to protect camels and extra towels.

Maybe you use them to protect hmm I dont know, strategic locations? Just because SAMs and bunkers protect something doesnt mean there is Nukes there...

[Telnyashka]

yeah, he was a brutal dictator, and there is a slam dunk case against him, which hes going to be hanged for sooner or later.

Im talking about him and his alleged WMDs and Nukes, not his murderous regime.

[usa320]

see this picture? The area surrounded by red lines is a 323,000 square foot underground facility covered with cement and earth, with 3 vehicle access points. This is at the Nataz enrichment site in Iran.

http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/album195/aau.jpg

[BarkingSquirrel]

Maybe you use them to protect hmm I dont know, strategic locations? Just because SAMs and bunkers protect something doesnt mean there is Nukes there...
Ah, but what's so strategic about a pile of sand? Gee, could it be something they're not supposed to have? Looks like a duck, walks like a duck - newsflash, it ain't a cow.

We're not iranians, we're not stupid enough to believe the bull****.

[Alan]

Lemme see, the same nation that once yelled "IRAQ HAS WMDS!!!!!", and missed horribly...

is now yelling "IRAN HAS A NUKE PROGRAM!!!"

I'm sorry, but American credibility is at zero right now as far as these things go. The last time was a blunder, US didn't listen and ended up in a quagmire ass for no reason.

What makes this time so bloody different?

[tyovan]

guess again. The US doesnt import oil from Iran.

World oil export leaders and their reliance on the U.S. consumer market
(numbers are in million barrels per day, data from EIA)
Country / Net Oil Exports / U.S. Imports / Reliance on U.S. Market
Saudi Arabia 8.7 1.27 15%
Russia 6.6 0.047 <1%
Norway 2.9 0.1 3%
Iran 2.5 0 0%
Venezuela 2.3 1.01 44%
UAE 2.3 0.021 <1%
Kuwait 2.2 0.27 12%
Nigeria 2.1 1.16 55%
Mexico 1.8 1.66 92%
Canada 1.8 1.8 99+%
Algeria 1.6 0.26 16%
Iraq 1.4 0.57 41%
Libya 1.3 0.051 4%
Kazakhstan 1.0 0 0%
Qatar 1.0 0 0%


Iran is one of the top 5 of the world's oil producers, however the US does not import Oil, or for that matter, much of anything at all, from Iran. So an embargo on their oil shipments would hurt them VERY hard and hurt us barely at all.

If Iran was persuing nuclear research for peaceful purposes, it would have accepted the Russian's plan.


Thanks, I didn't know we didn't buy much from them. I assumed we had an embargo on pretty much everything but oil. However, I think an oil embargo - if we get an international oil embargo against them will still affect us. Although they don't sell oil to us, they sell it to other countries. Those other countries, when they can no longer buy from Iran, will have to make up the difference by buying from other nations - nations that we buy from as well. The demand for oil from these non-embargoed nations would increase, thereby driving the price up for everyone, including the US.

[Telnyashka]

see this picture? The area surrounded by red lines is a 323,000 square foot underground facility covered with cement and earth, with 3 vehicle access points. This is at the Nataz enrichment site in Iran.

http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/album195/aau.jpg

hmmm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030205-powell-un-17300pf-12.jpg

So, I assume the Nuclear Weapons in Iran is a "slam dunk" case eh?

[usa320]

and before you ask how i know that the photographed pile of flat dirt is an underground bunker, heres how i know. This photo was taken a few months before the one above:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/images/natanz-ik-20sept2002_1.jpg

[usa320]

hmmm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030205-powell-un-17300pf-12.jpg

So, I assume the Nuclear Weapons in Iran is a "slam dunk" case eh?

that proves nothing... IT clearly shows vehicles at the suspected chemical weapons site, so if anything, all it proves is that Iraq moved the weapons prior to the war.

[Opening Batsman]

Lemme see, the same nation that once yelled "IRAQ HAS WMDS!!!!!", and missed horribly...

is now yelling "IRAN HAS A NUKE PROGRAM!!!"

I'm sorry, but American credibility is at zero right now as far as these things go. The last time was a blunder, US didn't listen and ended up in a quagmire ass for no reason.

What makes this time so bloody different?

Exactly. It is the same thing again, there is no good evidence that these WMDs exist, yet they are still preying on people's fears to get support for another bull*censored**censored**censored**censored* campaign.

[usa320]

Exactly. It is the same thing again, there is no good evidence that these WMDs exist, yet they are still preying on people's fears to get support for another bull*censored**censored**censored**censored* campaign.


no, there is a *censored**censored**censored**censored*load of evidence...

its just a matter of a very small amount of it being made public. Rightfully so.

[Alan]

no, there is a *censored**censored**censored**censored*load of evidence...

its just a matter of a very small amount of it being made public. Rightfully so.

That's what you all said last time.

Fine, go to another war, *censored**censored**censored**censored* up your economy even more, kill more innocent people and good american soldiers, what does anyone care?

Honestly, the six billion of us, every last human being on Earth must secretly crave doomsday, look how hard we are working to bring it forth. Humanity's worst enemy is humanity itself.

[usa320]

That's what you all said last time.

Fine, go to another war, *censored**censored**censored**censored* up your economy even more, kill more innocent people and good american soldiers, what does anyone care?

Honestly, the six billion of us, every last human being on Earth must secretly crave doomsday, look how hard we are working to bring it forth. Humanity's worst enemy is humanity itself.


put your tinfoil hat on... the end is upon us...

Actually, it should be noted that the Iranian leader has said on several occasions he plans to facilitate Armeggeddon.

[Alan]

put your tinfoil hat on... the end is upon us...

I'm not the one who is rambling on about hidden bunkers with villians toting nukes.

[ViktorNavorski]

From the postings, I take it few even read the articles and even fewer was able to discern it.

[Apathy]

From the postings, I take it few even read the articles and even fewer was able to discern it.


Welcome to the Internets.

[usa320]

I'm not the one who is rambling on about hidden bunkers with villians toting nukes.


jesus, how could you not believe it...the photos i posted showed the undeground construction clear as day...im not rambling about anything, i just posted some factual images.

[Opening Batsman]

no, there is a *censored**censored**censored**censored*load of evidence...

its just a matter of a very small amount of it being made public. Rightfully so.

So, pray tell, how do you know about it?

[Alan]

jesus, how could you not believe it...the photos i posted showed the undeground construction clear as day...im not rambling about anything, i just posted some factual images.

Okay, showing what exactly?

Very blurry images of structures.

Basically, the same kind of thing the media was hell bent on shoving down everybody's throats prior to Iraq. I see no bloody difference.

History will keep repeating itself I guess.

[Alan]

And what if it all proves to be false once more, I wonder, what's the excuse gonna be THIS time?
Aliens? Gremlins? The Sasquatch or Dracula?

[usa320]

So, pray tell, how do you know about it?


nobody does except those are in the know, but i think if you look at the information that is publicly availible, and assume that the information that is NOT publicly availible is even more detailed, i think its a safe bet for the public to assume that such research is taking place... lets face it, we will never ever see every single document and predator overflight image, we will never read the HUMINT reports... we as a public are given very little information, so we have to make our judgements based on that, that being said, i think the information we have on Iran is for the most part pretty damning.

You do not build a 323,000 square foot bunker under 3-10ft of concrete and even more earth that is capable of vehicle entry unless you are doing something that 1)is on an incredibly large scale, 2)you want protected at all costs and 3) you do not want people to see. YOu do not surround the same site with two dozen air defense sites either unless you really do not want something destroyed by air strikes.

and going back to Enrichment... the civilian usefullness of Uranium enrichment is very little in this day and age... If they wanted to enrich Uranium for civilian purposes, they had an open opportunity to do it under the supervision of the Russians, which they refused.

[Opening Batsman]

And what if it all proves to be false once more, I wonder, what's the excuse gonna be THIS time?
Aliens? Gremlins? The Sasquatch or Dracula?
Duh, they went to Syria.

[usa320]

Okay, showing what exactly?

Very blurry images of structures.

Basically, the same kind of thing the media was hell bent on shoving down everybody's throats prior to Iraq. I see no bloody difference.

History will keep repeating itself I guess.


those images werent blurry, they were some of the clearest out there, and they clearly showed construction of bunkers at the Nataz nuclear plant.

[Alan]

I remember having conversations very similar to this prior to Iraq as well. The other side was just as agressive, just as righteous, and look what happened. Pfft...

[Alan]

those images werent blurry, they were some of the clearest out there, and they clearly showed construction of bunkers at the Nataz nuclear plant.

There could be anything in them, still doesen't prove Iran is developing nukes.

[usa320]

common sense. Would you spend the money, money that you barely have, to build a massive underground bunker to protect 'anything'?

if it was anything, why not keep it out in the open?

[Telnyashka]

common sense. Would you spend the money, money that you barely have, to build a massive underground bunker to protect 'anything'?

if it was anything, why not keep it out in the open?

Common sense isnt evidence.

[Alan]

common sense. Would you spend the money, money that you barely have, to build a massive underground bunker to protect 'anything'?

if it was anything, why not keep it out in the open?

Lemme see, it is nuclear material, so safety might be a good point if something went screwy. Or protection from the elements.

[Apathy]

Common sense isnt evidence.

Ok. So if I turn around a corner and I see a guy with a smoking gun and a dead body at his feet, it proves nothing. Is that correct?

[Alan]

Common sense isnt evidence.

Basically, but hey.. maybe they're right, only time will tell.

After last time though, my tendency is to disregard this ne "threat" as more paranoid bull from the western media.

[Opening Batsman]

common sense. Would you spend the money, money that you barely have, to build a massive underground bunker to protect 'anything'?

if it was anything, why not keep it out in the open?

So the extent of your argument comes down to that. "Common sense". It is funny how everybody else is so stupid that we can't realise it as well.

[Alan]

Ok. So if I turn around a corner and I see a guy with a smoking gun and a dead body at his feet, it proves nothing. Is that correct?

That would actually be evidence, more than just common sense.

Gun, bullet body = material evidence.

The situation = circumstantial evidence.

[Ea$y-8]

Looks like things with Iran are getting ugly fast. This is one of the countless threads regarding Iran's nuclear program. I think it needs to be dealt with and fast one way or another. We can't let Iran have nukes they are to dangerous. I don't think Iran will back down because of diplomatic pressure they are hell bent on getting nukes and will not stop unless they are stopped by force. If we invade Iran it will be nice to have sweet payback for the Iranian Hostage Crisis **** they pulled in 1979. Iran is way outta control and god help the west if they get their hands on a nuke


Will we be forced to wait until it is to late like we did last time?

http://www.stripersonline.com/images/WTC_9.11.jpg

[Apathy]

That would actually be evidence, more than just common sense.

Gun, bullet body = material evidence.

The situation = circumstantial evidence.

No you shut the f*ck up, you American idiot! I did not seem him commit the act of murder nor did he admit to it! He did not shoot that person because I f*cking said SO! So you shut your worthless mouth. IM RIGHT, YOU'RE WRONG!





</sarcasm>

[Ea$y-8]

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/NuclearEnds-X.gif

[usa320]

So the extent of your argument comes down to that. "Common sense". It is funny how everybody else is so stupid that we can't realise it as well.

Exactly what im trying to say. You, Alan and Tenyska are stupid. I dont beat around the bush.

[Alan]

Exactly what im trying to say. You, Alan and Tenyska are stupid. I dont beat around the bush.

Wohhoo.. yeah!

Personal insults are a good way to increase credibility!

No... wait.. that just makes you sound like a total... ah nevermind. Yes, Iran has nukes, they are evil evil people who eat babies, Bush is our saviour and US should dermocrify the world.

CHEERS!!!

[EvanL]

Exactly what im trying to say. You, Alan and Tenyska are stupid. I dont beat around the bush.
Crap dude. You are honestly the sorriest person on this board. You're more full of sh*t than my boxer dogs impacted colon. If you argue make a frickin point. You never come off as serious or even half serious. You repeat the same crap over and over and cease to ever make a point!!
Just stop posting until you can figuire out how to actually use your brain, instead of posting random thoughs spurred up by momentary spats of cerebral gas emmissions. I.E. a brain fart.

[usa320]

Crap dude. You are honestly the sorriest person on this board. You're more full of sh*t than my boxer dogs impacted colon. If you argue make a frickin point. You never come off as serious or even half serious. You repeat the same crap over and over and cease to ever make a point!!
Just stop posting until you can figuire out how to actually use your brain, instead of posting random thoughs spurred up by momentary spats of cerebral gas emmissions. I.E. a brain fart.


and you are just a two bit asshole who has done nothing but take cheap shots at me since i started posting hear... I really dont care though...big deal, does insulting me increase the size of your e-ego or something?

Jesus, its the internet. Get a life or something. The past 2 weeks ive barely posted here and now i remember why. People here need to get outside.

[EvanL]

and you are just a two bit asshole who has done nothing but take cheap shots at me since i started posting hear... I really dont care though...big deal, does insulting me increase the size of your e-ego or something?

Jesus, its the internet. Get a life or something. The past 2 weeks ive barely posted here and now i remember why. People here need to get outside.
Ohh yes. The outdoors. How long it has been since I have been there. Does it still rain? I've heard tapping but that may have been your boyfriends body locked in the trunk in my bassment. I haven't heard that noise in over a week though. Perhaps you should be worried with his sudden disappearance? Or have you already moved on and found another bloke with a tighter arsehole and even less teeth?

[Alan]

What's an outdoors?

[Apathy]

Time to post random pictures again?

[tiengulden]

The American is a bellicose race.

[sferrin]

The American is a bellicose race.

ROTFL!!!!!! If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black. You're from easily THE most bellicose nation on the planet.

[Apathy]

The American is a bellicose race.

Yes and of course, the Chinese have never fought a war in their history. They never invaded Korea countless times, they never had civil wars for centuries, they never took over Tibet, they never threatened to take over Taiwan, they never got involved in the Korean War and f*cked everything up, and they certainly never built nuclear weapons.

And what's this about the pot being the same as the kettle? The pot is way different from the kettle. Anyone who says otherwise is a f*cktard!

(Woah deja vu.)

[ABNINF]

I see alot children in here arguing. "You're a stupid head," "NO! You are!". Try to look at the facts. Whether or not Iran has any real nukes yet, their leader has made numerous threats against the US and Israel in particular. Just to give you an idea on how other countries percieve the threat from Iran, FRANCE and the UN believe it's a credible threat. Iran refuses to allow inspectors into it's most secretive sites and thumbs its nose at the UN. Yes, US intelligence was "flawed" before I Iraq. My personal belief is that it all got over the border into Syria, but that's MY belief, and hasn't been backed up by "official" evidence. One of the reasons that I believe they got it out before we went in, is I've had friends that were in Baghdad during and after the initial invasion. IED's would go off and trigger the chemical alarms. A family friend (Air Force NBC EOD), responded to 3 seperate instances of this where Serin was in the air, but in insufficient quantities to cause harm. There was an insurgent cell that was found dead in their apartment from nerve agent poisoning, when the mortar rounds they had(which weren't that old, and in good condition) leaked it into the air and killed them. This is a first hand account by a friend that was there, but it's the stuff that's never reported in the media. It boils down to, if you've got nothing to hide, why are you being secretive? I hope we don't go to war with Iran, it will mean the deaths of more US and coalition soldiers, BUT, IF Iran has a Nuke weapons program, like most of the free world believes, do you really want Iran as a nuclear power? The best defence is a good offense. One of the major reasons WWII happened, is because no one would stand up to Germany. I pray that I'm wrong, I truly do, but if Iran has them, or is working to get them, they need to be stopped, with whatever means it takes. Can't we all just get along :-D?

[EvanL]

Yes and of course, the Chinese have never fought a war in their history. They never invaded Korea countless times, they never had civil wars for centuries, they never took over Tibet, they never threatened to take over Taiwan, they never got involved in the Korean War and f*cked everything up, and they certainly never built nuclear weapons.

And what's this about the pot being the same as the kettle? The pot is way different from the kettle. Anyone who says otherwise is a f*cktard!

(Woah deja vu.)
Wouldn't this argument now involve the two kitchen instruments being called yellow?
;)
You know I love you Apathy.

[Apathy]

Wouldn't this argument now involve the two kitchen instruments being called yellow?
;)
You know I love you Apathy.

Yellow pots?! ZOMG, that is liek teh BEST TH!NG SINCE THE RICE COOKER!

[EvanL]

Yellow pots?! ZOMG, that is liek teh BEST TH!NG SINCE THE RICE COOKER!
We Soh Solly Foh Parl Harbah!

[Apathy]

We Soh Solly Foh Parl Harbah!

Me no undelstand yo English. Speak Kolean you Japanese plick!

[tiengulden]

The American government should spend money the exaltation people's welfare first, the American people should enjoy own brief whole life under the sunlight of California first.

[usa320]

Yes Great comrade, For China we must take off for Great Jusice to California in the Sun!

[Apathy]

The American government should spend money the exaltation people's welfare first, the American people should enjoy own brief whole life under the sunlight of California first.

Americans live better than most other people in the world. I don't think we need to focus any more on how to improve our lives.

[Apathy]

Yes Great comrade, For China we must take off for Great Jusice to California in the Sun!

For GREAT JUSTICE!

[usa320]

did someone from CHina just tell me that AMERICA needs to spend more money towards the welfare of its people?

[tiengulden]

If I am an American, I can't for the sake of a the segment conscript an advertisement to run to several thousand kilometers to walk into death outside.
The life onlies have once!

[Apathy]

If I am an American, I can't for the sake of a the segment conscript an advertisement to run to several thousand kilometers to walk into death outside.
The life onlies have once!

Don't try to copy OMEGA7. >:(

[usa320]

did not great one of website have block against beijing and similar IP? he must do. It is good thing to do.

[tiengulden]

The United States is also the most serious nation in social problem, only they feel arrive by themselves.

[usa320]

yes but arrive is not what matter it is decent that important for all.

[Apathy]

01000101011011100110011101101100011010010111001101101000001000000
10011010110111101110100011010000110010101110010011001100111010101
10001101101011011001010111001000101100001000000111100101101111011
10101001000000111001101110000011001010110000101101011001000000110
1001011101000011111100100001

[tiengulden]

We also could not feel the social problem of our nations equally, because of have no which government would like to let the own people know an own problem completely.

[Ea$y-8]

Double post sorry guys...

[Ea$y-8]

http://img25.photobucket.com/albums/v74/joewallace7/flamewar.jpg

[tiengulden]

I think always and can't let many lifes of innocent peoples demolish in the war for the sake of several individuals benefits!

[jmatucd]

We also could not feel the social problem of our nations equally, because of have no which government would like to let the own people know an own problem completely.

Hey chief, this is an English only board, that extends to syntax & grammar as well.

[Ea$y-8]

The American government should spend money the exaltation people's welfare first, the American people should enjoy own brief whole life under the sunlight of California first.

Right... could you give me a copy of Mao's little read book? He showed the people how to live in paradise and work together. Same could happen here in America we could all become part of a flawless utopia under the sun sounds like a great (five year) plan. Let us take to the streets and Revolt against the capitalist swine, would you care to join us - comrade?

MASSIVE SARCASM TAG TO THE ABOVE!!!!!

[Opening Batsman]

Viva La Revolution!!!

[AmericanImperialist]

The American is a bellicose race.
The English has eluded you.

[Bullet Donor]

It's go time!

[tiengulden]

The English has eluded you.

"我使用一个翻译软件将中文翻译成英文，结果很令人失望。我期待着更优秀的翻译软件的出现。"
I use a translation software to translate Chinese into English, the result disappoints very much.
I also hope to get more excellent translation software.

[sferrin]

And what's this about the pot being the same as the kettle? The pot is way different from the kettle. Anyone who says otherwise is a f*cktard!

(Woah deja vu.)

Talk about f*cktard. How about learning the meaning of a comment before commenting on it?

[welshmann]

jesus ure acting like a bunch of mongs,why all u tree huggers seem to *censored**censored**censored**censored*ing think the US got a problem with the rest of the world,to me this thread has turned into an excuse to have a bash at the USA,no im not yank,but i can tell u if iran get their way its all of our problem.

[Apathy]

Talk about f*cktard. How about learning the meaning of a comment before commenting on it?

Jesus, do I have to start adding the THE LARGE SARCASM TAG again?

[M_S]

guess again. The US doesnt import oil from Iran.

World oil export leaders and their reliance on the U.S. consumer market
(numbers are in million barrels per day, data from EIA)
Country / Net Oil Exports / U.S. Imports / Reliance on U.S. Market
Saudi Arabia 8.7 1.27 15%
Russia 6.6 0.047 <1%
Norway 2.9 0.1 3%
Iran 2.5 0 0%
Venezuela 2.3 1.01 44%
UAE 2.3 0.021 <1%
Kuwait 2.2 0.27 12%
Nigeria 2.1 1.16 55%
Mexico 1.8 1.66 92%
Canada 1.8 1.8 99+%
Algeria 1.6 0.26 16%
Iraq 1.4 0.57 41%
Libya 1.3 0.051 4%
Kazakhstan 1.0 0 0%
Qatar 1.0 0 0%


Iran is one of the top 5 of the world's oil producers, however the US does not import Oil, or for that matter, much of anything at all, from Iran. So an embargo on their oil shipments would hurt them VERY hard and hurt us barely at all.

If Iran was persuing nuclear research for peaceful purposes, it would have accepted the Russian's plan.


uhmmm.....ok....lol.

Guess what it doesnt work that way, prices will go up.

[Banner_of_America]

Sferrin is one of the best posters ever on military websites. Show some freaking respect, the rest of you.

Iran needs to hear the voice of the international community. Even if we have to pin a note on a MOAB to get it across.

Don't develop nuclear weapons because your government is insane.

[BlackRain]

Will the American people put up with that though? The people here bitch whenever the cost of gas goes up by a few pennies. An oil embargo against Iran would cause the cost to rise by a few dollars.

The USA has not imported oil from Iran in years.

[BlackRain]

You're more full of sh*t than my boxer dogs impacted colon.

Is that true?

Were you double baggin it ?

rofl

Sorry could not resist.

[caridon]

The USA has not imported oil from Iran in years.

As explaine earlier in the thread. A embargo would hurt hte US, even if the US does not import oil from iran. The countries that buys oil from iran would have to fins other suplyers and would then compete with hte US on the fre market. this would drive prices upp
(and as the world today has a very thin margin on oilproduction the price changes would be HIGH)

/C

[BlackRain]

As explaine earlier in the thread. A embargo would hurt hte US, even if the US does not import oil from iran. The countries that buys oil from iran would have to fins other suplyers and would then compete with hte US on the fre market. this would drive prices upp
(and as the world today has a very thin margin on oilproduction the price changes would be HIGH)

/C


There is not a 'thin' margin on oil these days. There actually is an over production.

OPEC may cut oil output to trim surplus (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/)
Feb 16, 2006
http://www.thedailyjournalonline.com/article.asp?CategoryId=10717&ArticleId=225465

The problem lies with environmentalists. They are responsible for high gasoline prices.

The real reason is that we have not built a single new oil refinery in the USA since the 1970's due to environmental restrictions. So, oil can be converted easily into kerosene, diesel, aviation fuel, or gas.

So the next time you pay sky high prices for gas, thank a greenie.

[Vandervahn]

...
The problem lies with environmentalists. They are responsible for high gasoline prices.

The real reason is that we have not built a single new oil refinery in the USA since the 1970's due to environmental restrictions. So, oil can be converted easily into kerosene, diesel, aviation fuel, or gas.

So the next time you pay sky high prices for gas, thank a greenie.
Now that is BS. Of course there is a certain influence of environmental policy on the costs of production and refinery, but the PRICE of the Oil is determined by the crude Oil trading and speculation - where do you think the record profits for oil companies come from? Because 15% more cars were sold in a single year?

[caridon]

There is not a 'thin' margin on oil these days. There actually is an over production.

OPEC may cut oil output to trim surplus (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/)
Feb 16, 2006
http://www.thedailyjournalonline.com/article.asp?CategoryId=10717&ArticleId=225465

The problem lies with environmentalists. They are responsible for high gasoline prices.

The real reason is that we have not built a single new oil refinery in the USA since the 1970's due to environmental restrictions. So, oil can be converted easily into kerosene, diesel, aviation fuel, or gas.

So the next time you pay sky high prices for gas, thank a greenie.

The only reason the US hasent built any new refinaries are because you write your laws badly.

The emissions control laws that were mandated grandfatherd the existin plants. this made them cheaper to operate (because they could dump their *censored**censored**censored**censored* on everyone) If you had written the laws sensibly you would have stated that from day/year x EVERYONE had to comly with the law. and there would have been a level playing field.

but the big oil lobying won.

So dont blame a "greenie" blame the oil loby and your idiot politichans.

and ps the cut Opec talks about is only about 1/3 of irans daily production so it is not enough to offset a embargo.
(and if you havent noticed yet both saudi and kuwait has reached max output from their main fields, those are the 2 biggest fields in the whole world.)

/C