 |
| |
|
|
Thorn
|
 |
Asheville, NC
May 1999
time: 00:37
|
|
quote:
Bush: All Options Open for Iran Nukes
By RAMIT PLUSHNICK-MASTI, Associated Press Writer 53 minutes ago
In a stern warning to Iran, President Bush said "all options are on the table" if the Iranians refuse to comply with international demands to halt their nuclear program, pointedly noting he has already used force to protect U.S. security.
Bush's statement during an interview on Israeli TV late Friday was unusually harsh. He previously said diplomacy should be used to persuade Iran to suspend its nuclear program and if that failed then the U.N. Security Council should impose sanctions.
The U.S. government and others fear Iran's nuclear work is secretly designed to produce nuclear weapons. Iran's leaders deny that, saying it is only for the generation of electricity.
In the interview, Bush said the United States and Israel "are united in our objective to make sure that Iran does not have a weapon."
But, he said, if diplomacy fails "all options are on the table."
"The use of force is the last option for any president. You know, we've used force in the recent past to secure our country," he said.
Iran's government resumed uranium conversion at its nuclear facility in Isfahan this past week. The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, responded by issuing a warning to Iran on Thursday that expressed "serious concern" about Iran's intentions.
Bush welcomed the warning, which signaled that the West wanted to give diplomacy time to ease the standoff.
In Vienna, Austria, where the IAEA is based, diplomats said Iran faced a Sept. 3 deadline to stop uranium conversion or face possible referral to the Security Council, which has the power to impose crippling sanctions. The diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the IAEA board's proceedings.
Iran, which insists its nuclear program is peaceful, responded with indignation to the IAEA warning. |
Finally, I don't know anyone here would disagree with me that Iran MUST NOT have nuclear weapons. I thought Bush had lost some of his ability to act, but apparently I was wrong, luckly. Last thing we or the world needs is a nuclear bomb going off in the United States. The shitstorm that that would create is almost beyond comprehension. In the least Herr Bush would have emergency powers... do I even need to go down what that path would lead to? -- A very pissed off and dangerous version of the Roman Empire.
I've been saying for day 1 of the Iraq war that we NEED to focus on Iran, they've hated us, for much longer and much harsher then Iraq ever did.
I would fully support a war or whatever option that will resolve the crisis with Iran getting nuclear weapons. Support our troops, you bet you're sorry ass I would if they were defending us from Iran. I would not support anti-war demonstrators in the case of Iran.
Hopefully a less life costly thing will happen with Iran, but their Nuclear Program MUST be CEASED!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Max Webster
|
|
Thank god there are few Americans like Imran who have brain in their head.
gives me some hope for the future of America and more importantly the future of the world.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Max Webster
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thorn
If you think everything is ok with Iran and they love us and want to snuggle with us, then why don't you go wear a Proud to be an American, or GO USA shirt in Tehran, see how far you get before....... well I won't even say what they'd do to you, its above NC-17 if this was on TV. |
I wonder if wearing a T-shirt that says " I love Islam" in the heart of Texas would have any negative effect.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
When are we going to get a President that doesn't have a major boner for war?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:37
|
|
Yeah, just like all options were on the table with regards to NK. Wait, I remember Bush saying we would NEVER allow NK to have nukes. Then the North Koreans got seevral pounds of Plutonium out of secure and monitored storage and now who knows were it is.
Of course this was the same admin. that gave us the unqualified success in Iraq....... And has finally crushed the Taliban and made Afghanistan safe after 4 years....
The US will go at it utterly alone if it decides to attack Iran, since it has 0 justification whatsoever for any military straike against Iran's nuclear facilities unless authorized by the Sec. Council and that won't happen.
Besides, airstrikes would fail, in the sense of NOT stopping Iran, who would continue on its merry way, with the added ability to blame everything on the uS. I mean, iof the US likes the current president of Iran so much, we could make him stronger internally in ways less expensive than dropping bombs, but hey, if that is what rock's Bush's boat.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Uh, guys, before I go to bed. The Shia have their own militias, that have been stepping up activity after the various massacres of fighting age Shia males in mixed areas by Sunni insurgents. Maybe, just maybe, Iran is helping arm them in the hope that once the US pulls out that a Civil War will create another Shia theocracy. Anotherwise, the Iranians are helping creating their own Ulster paras(militaries), to borrow from another conflict, which will be able to match the Sunnis atrocity for atrocity. Yippee, you too can have four centuries of religious conflict and atrocities.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-08-2005 22:09
|