Reply With QuoteIsn't this what they've been saying since the start?
'Obama signaled Khamenei that U.S. could accept civilian nuclear program in Iran'
http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-e...-iran-1.423057Washington Post's David Ignatius says U.S. president passed a message to Iran, through Turkish PM Erdogan, that he could agree to a civilian nuclear program if Tehran proved it was not building a nuclear bomb.
Isn't this what they've been saying since the start?
Who?Originally Posted by Lov3ll
123456789
The phrase " ... if Tehran proved it was not building a nuclear bomb" is the central component of that position.
From the article:
The U.S., Obama also wrote, would also expect Iranian leaders to prove that Tehran does not have a military nuclear program.
And how do they propose Iran "prove" they're not making a bomb? Inspections? And what will the penalty be for denying inspectors access (which everybody knows will happen)?
In the next episode: Obama could agree to a civilian nuclear bomb if Tehran proved it was not building a military nuclear bomb aimed at United States...
If I were Iran, I would just build nukes and missiles; get some security going - know what I mean?
Yeah I know what you mean, If you were Iran then you are a dead man walking.
That is my understanding too.
And nobody is asking Iran not to use Nuclear power for energy purposes, but both of us know, what Iran regime is all about, right?
An instructive overview of the possible negotiated outcomes by Dennis Ross: http://www.timesofisrael.com/what-co...-iran-produce/
Sure... You made me smile..
Because it worked so well with North Korea?
Continuation of the status quo. More importantly what would be the reward for full cooperation with inspections? Technical assistance, regularization of trade and diplomatic relations with the West, contracting for training of nuclear engineers and technicians which would be a leap forward in a self sufficient nuclear program, academic exchanges with western and other middle eastern universities to advance their own nuclear academic culture etc.
The catch is: It all hinges on proof and cooperation which will not be forthcoming. But that being said I see no reason anyone should be criticized for offering a reward for compliance.
that he could agree to a civilian nuclear program
Huh? Any signatory member of NPT has unconditional right to persue peaceful nuclear technology, that should never be a question anywhere...
Now about proving the peaceful nature of Iranian nuclear program - isn't the accuser the one who should prove the accusations? Not trying to defend Iran here, they should open the door to their suspicious sites widely to remove the doubt.
Posting Permissions
