PDA

View Full Version : Defiant Iran threatens nuclear free-for-all



BlackRain
04-26-2006, 08:11 AM
Defiant Iran threatens nuclear free-for-all

26/04/2006 - 6:59:22 AM

A defiant and threatening Iran said it would hide its nuclear program if the West took “harsh measures” after this week’s UN Security Council deadline for Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment.

Beyond that, Iran yesterday openly offered to transfer nuclear technology to other countries, including chaos-ridden Sudan.

Ali Larijani, the top Iranian nuclear negotiator, also renewed the country’s vow to end cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and said increasing pressure on Iran would only stiffen its resolve.

“If you take harsh measures, we will hide this program. If you use the language of force, you should not expect us to act transparently,” Larijani said, adding that western countries on the IAEA board “have to understand they cannot resolve this issue through force.”

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who was visiting Greece and Turkey, fired back almost immediately.

“Iranians can threaten, but they are deepening their own isolation,” she said.

Top leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued the offer to transfer nuclear technology as he met with Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir.

“Iran’s nuclear capability is one example of various scientific capabilities in the country. … The Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to transfer the experience, knowledge and technology of its scientists,” Khamenei told al-Bashir.

Al-Bashir said last month that his impoverished, violence-ridden country was considering a nuclear program to generate electrical power.

Such a technology transfer would be legal as long as it is between signatory-states to the non-proliferation treaty, and the IAEA was informed.

Word of the transfer offer became public by the time Rice reached Ankara, Turkey, prompting her to respond yet again.

We “have to be concerned when there are statements from Iran that Iran would not only have this technology, but would share it, share technology and expertise,” Rice told a news conference.

The former Iranian Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi, meanwhile, said US and Israeli spies, in a bid to entrap Tehran, had tried to sell it enriched uranium but the offers were rejected. He did not say when the alleged attempts were made.

“The US and Israeli intelligence agencies repeatedly tried discredit Iran but failed to succeed. They repeatedly sent spies with the intention with selling enriched uranium to Iran and then to start a campaign against us.
“They got no reply thanks to the vigilance of our intelligence community,” he said yesterday.

With the approaching Friday UN deadline, Iran has become more defiant almost daily.

“If UN Security Council sanctions are to be imposed on Iran, we will definitely suspend our cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency,” Larijani said, echoing the words of hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad only a day earlier.

Iran’s defiant stance appeared to stem in part from opposition to sanctions by Russia and China, both permanent, veto-holding members of the Security Council.

“We see no alternative to the negotiations process,” Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency while in Beijing for a regional anti-terrorism meeting.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang urged all parties “to show flexibility,” saying the international community should not abandon efforts for a peaceful settlement.

The US has not openly threatened military action and says it wants a diplomatic solution as well, but US President George Bush has said all options, including military force, remain on the table.

Britain, meanwhile, also warned Iran against miscalculating its moves.
“The Iranians, in my judgment, would miscalculate if they believed that Russia or China would block appropriate and effective sanctions, which targeted the regime, not the ordinary population,” Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said.
The US and European allies are expected to press for binding measures against Iran when the Security Council begins the next round of rview of the Iranian case as soon as next week.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaking/story.asp?j=208551980&p=zx855z795&n=208552866&x=

Ol' Bob
04-26-2006, 10:19 PM
It just seems like they're trying to provoke us now.

Howie Kaluha
04-26-2006, 10:22 PM
It just seems like they're trying to provoke us now.

Yeah, those cocky SOBs are asking for it.

Belrick
04-26-2006, 10:59 PM
Sigh.

They probably wouldn't be being so provocative this if it not for them believing that America has already 'shot its bolt' politically, military involvement and peoples will with Iraq.

IMHO anyway.

You have to ask these questions; Is GWB in any position to start a new war when his popularity is so low? Can the US afford another war and can the US military front up to another ground war without mobilizing more troops? ie: conscription? Does the US have enough political clout to bring in allies for this war? Aussie yes, Britain, doubtful. Any other nation? Unlikely at this stage.

EsoognomEhT
04-26-2006, 11:01 PM
You get articles from some funny sources; Irish Examiner?! rofl

Belrick
04-26-2006, 11:04 PM
Why do you think that only fox reporters write factual articles?

Howie Kaluha
04-26-2006, 11:06 PM
Sigh.

They probably wouldn't be being so provocative this if it not for them believing that America has already 'shot its bolt' politically, military involvement and peoples will with Iraq.

IMHO anyway.

You have to ask these questions; Is GWB in any position to start a new war when his popularity is so low? Can the US afford another war and can the US military front up to another ground war without mobilizing more troops? ie: conscription? Does the US have enough political clout to bring in allies for this war? Aussie yes, Britain, doubtful. Any other nation? Unlikely at this stage.

Hey, I'm not saying the U.S. will do "it". The fact of the matter is that IF Israel got pissed off enough, they're a major superpower that shouldn't be underestimated. Personally, I don't think America should get itself involved in another war anytime soon. I think Israel should go at it p-)

EsoognomEhT
04-26-2006, 11:12 PM
Why do you think that only fox reporters write factual articles?


Sorry did someone just use the words Fox and Factual in the same sentence? rofl

XxDualityxX
04-26-2006, 11:17 PM
I hope we set these fu**ers back 500 years till they beg at our feet.

sferrin
04-27-2006, 12:05 AM
Sigh.

They probably wouldn't be being so provocative this if it not for them believing that America has already 'shot its bolt' politically, military involvement and peoples will with Iraq.

IMHO anyway.

You have to ask these questions; Is GWB in any position to start a new war when his popularity is so low? Can the US afford another war and can the US military front up to another ground war without mobilizing more troops? ie: conscription? Does the US have enough political clout to bring in allies for this war? Aussie yes, Britain, doubtful. Any other nation? Unlikely at this stage.


Who says it has to be a war? Bomb the **** out of them for a couple days and call it good.

Ayura
04-27-2006, 04:23 AM
First, we have the headline which says:


Defiant Iran threatens nuclear free-for-all


Then in the article it says:


A defiant and threatening Iran said it would hide its nuclear program if the West took “harsh measures” after this week’s UN Security Council deadline for Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment.


Talk about misleading...oh no wait - Western Media has been doing this for years now...

Till Eulenspiegel
04-27-2006, 05:52 AM
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/3324/n61000185215414sv.jpg

Ayura
04-27-2006, 06:19 AM
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/3324/n61000185215414sv.jpg


...You forgot about Zakaat...

LazerLordz
04-27-2006, 09:40 AM
Heck, this is for that mad hatter of a President..

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/898/burnhouse9kn8fp.jpg