FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


US & Iran





manumiglani
Quote:
In its dealings with West Asian countries and in recent years with Iran, the United States has shown beyond any shadow of doubt that it is singularly unprincipled.

If it has any principle, it is that nobody should challenge it on any ground. Washington would do anything to maintain its present status as the world’s only Super Power.

And sad to say, western European powers, especially Britain, France and Germany (the so-called E-3) seem only too willing to fall in line with American illusions.

Let us face it: there is no divine law which says that only western powers should have the right to stock weapons of mass destruction. We are living in the twenty-first century and not in the nineteenth when European powers went berserk to establish their Euro-centric empires.

Asian nations were looked down upon. They were assigned the tasks of serving European interests as hewers of wood and drawers of water.

After the second world war, it was the turn of the United States to lay down what is right and what is wrong. Political manipulation was extensively resorted to, to suit Washington’s interests. If it paid the United States to be nice to Iran, it elevated the then Iranian ruler, the Shah, to the skies.

When the Shah’s help was no longer needed, he was summarily discarded and wasn’t even allowed to recieve medical attention in New York which he sorely needed.

When Pakistan’s services were badly needed, the United States turned a blind eye to Pakistan scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan’s world-wide dealings in nuclear proliferation. He was the CIA’s favourite playboy. To this day the man who should have been publicly hanged for his active efforts at nuclear proliferation remains free.

The United States again looked the other way when China, for its own reasons, started providing nuclear technology to Islamabad.

Pakistan’s efforts to become a nuclear power should have been put down with a stern hand. But it did not suit the United States, to do so. So Pakistan has become a nuclear power.

Both the United States and China wanted Pakistan to be a counter-force to India. So they both went along with Pakistan’s ambitions, forgetting the existence of the International Atomic Energy Agency. This Agency comes in handy merely to suit the purposes of European Powers. This should be exposed.

If Britain can be a nuclear power there is no reason why Iran also shouldn’t be one. Besides, if Pakistan can be tolerated why shouldn’t one tolerate Iran as well?

Iran has not attacked its neighbours unlike Pakistan which has waged three wars against India. Pakistan has been an active nuclear prolificator a charge that cannot be levelled against Iran.

The United States is needlessly getting hysterical. All that Iran is planning to do at this stage is to conduct research on uranium conversion and other aspects of the civilian nuclear fuel cycle.


The research is being conducted on facilities that are fully safeguarded by the International Atomic Energy Agency and is in no way prohibited under either the Nuclear Non-Proligeration Treaty (NPT) or Iran’s Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA, published by the Agency as Inf-Circ 214.


Indeed, the Agency’s inspectors had thoroughly looked into charges against Iran’s alleged malfeasance and cleared it.


Thus, in his report to the IAEA’s Board of Governors on 2 September 2005, its Director General, Mohammad el-Baradai noted that “all the declared nuclear material in Iran has been accounted for, and therefore such material is not diverted to prohibited activities”.

What better certificate of good intentions should Iran need to lished by the Agency as Inf-Circ 214. Indeed, the Agency’s inspectors had thoroughly looked into charges against Iran’s alleged malfeasance and cleared it.


Thus, in his report to the IAEA’s Board of Governors on 2 September 2005, its Director General, Mohammad el-Baradai noted that “all the declared nuclear material in Iran has been accounted for, and therefore such material is not diverted to prohibited activities”.

What better certificate of good intentions should Iran need to prove its straightforwardness? The point is that neither the United States, nor its running-dog, the E-3 want any Asian competitor in the nuclear business.

They want nuclear power as the exclusive monopoly of White European nations. This is unacceptable. What, one would like to ask, would the western powers do if Iran insists on developing its own nuclear weapons?

They threaten economic sanctions. In effect it would mean pitching the Islamic world against western nations. It may succeed or it may not, in the long run.

The United States may bomb Iranian nuclear installations and it is quite capable of such criminal activity. Given the current composition of IAEA’s 35-member Board of Governors, the US, besides should have no difficulty in garnering the votes needed to put Iran on the mat.

But, in the long run, will such tactics help? US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has been quoted as saying that she is optimistic about the support of IAEA Foreign Ministers in referring Iran’s case to the Security Council. She reportedly said: “We have got to finally demonstrate to Iran that it can’t with impunity just cast aside the just demands of the international community”.

Which international community is she speaking about? Not even Saudi Arabia is happy about the West’s sinister plans to isolate Iran. Only the other day Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal told BBC that the West is partly to blame for the crisis by allowing Israel to develop nuclear weapons.


And in a separate interview he said that nobody mentions that Israel has one hundred nuclear weapons in stock, though it is an open secret. What moral right has Israel to make nuclear bombs surreptitiously? The simple answer is: it has the backing of the United States. In international affairs that is all that matters.


One thing is clear: The United States and its satellites will not allow Iran to become a nuclear power, come what may. If Iran persists, it will be made to pay a heavy price.

The United States is shameless in the exercise of its power. It knows Israel is stacked with unauthorised nukes. It has a NATO base in Herat. Even more relevant, the US Fifth Fleet is all over the Persian Gulf. The target is Iran.


Never mind Britain has announced a Pound 25 billion replacement for the Trident missile. Never mind the E-3 has enough WMDs to destroy the world several times over.



Source: http://headlines.sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14136599

why can't IRAN use nuclear power for its civilian use?
Lennon
Since Iran and the US are in the United Nations, the UN should decide as leader if the states are responsible enough to produce nuclear fuel. Dead right, the US government is too patriotic.
ocalhoun
Lennon wrote:
Since Iran and the US are in the United Nations, the UN should decide as leader if the states are responsible enough to produce nuclear fuel. Dead right, the US government is too patriotic.

Bah, the UN does not rule the world. If they said no, Iran should not have nuclear power, then who would be stuck with enforcing it?
90% American troops, 5% forign troops, 5% diplomacy.
S3nd K3ys
manumiglani wrote:


why can't IRAN use nuclear power for its civilian use ? if everyone like Pakistan, Israel and usa make it so why can't IRAN make use of nuclear technology for peaceful use. Only Usa has used nukes till now. usa is a powerhouse of nukes and wmds. so why don't they are taken into UN ? man its right GANDHI JI said" UN is merely USA and ENGLAND".


There's not a problem with Iran using peaceful nukes. The problem is that Iran has PUBLICALLY admitted that they will wipe Israel off the face of the Earth and destroy the US and England.

Iran has also been found to be producing WEAPONS GRADE nuclear material, not ENERGY GRADE.

Perhaps a bit more research is in order before you start talking about something you know little or nothing about.
SunburnedCactus
S3nd K3ys wrote:
There's not a problem with Iran using peaceful nukes. The problem is that Iran has PUBLICALLY admitted that they will wipe Israel off the face of the Earth and destroy the US and England.


Time for me to move to Scotland. It's nicer anyway. Wink
Lennon
In europe and america we have innocent until proven guilty.
Bush, Blair and others don't seem to believe that.

Give Iran the benefit of the doubt, just keep a close eye on them.
manumiglani
------------------------
ocalhoun
The problem is that, unlike Russia, these Arab nations don't seem likely to be intimidated by retaliatory nuclear strikes.
Therefore, we cannot just allow them to obtain nukes and enter into a cold war. (which would be the most peacefull outcome possible short of Iran giving up nuclear ambitions.)
manumiglani
Lennon wrote:
In europe and america we have innocent until proven guilty.
Bush, Blair and others don't seem to believe that.



yeah just like S3nd K3ys they think that only they are right.
S3nd K3ys
manumiglani wrote:

i am sorry i forgot that you have direct relations with the shah of iran. he must have told you slightly and slowly in your ears that IRAN is going to destroy england and usa. yeah i know i dont know anything as i do not know shah of Iran personally as you do.


You're partially correct. You're sorry.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said Iran said PUBLICALLY that they were going to destroy England and the USA and wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

Do your homework before you start blathering off about something you obviously know little about. It's not making you look very smart.

Iranian President wrote:
“We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization. We must make use of everything we have at hand to strike at this front by means of our suicide operations or by means of our missiles.”


He went on to say
Quote:
"There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and in the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them."


and

Quote:
missiles are now ready to strike at their civilization, and as soon as the instructions arrive from Leader [Ali Khamenei], we will launch our missiles at their cities and installations."


and

Quote:
"the world will witness the annihilation of this arrogant regime."


<edit>
removed comment about the lack of mental capacity of a certain member
</edit>
Soulfire
They can, but not unless they tell everyone what they are truly developing nuclear technologies for. They have not confirmed no nuclear weapons, and until that happens, Iran is under heavy surveilence.

Scenario 1:
We say "Okay, continue developing your nuclear technologies."

With no interference, Iran creates nuclear warheads and unleashes them at every country not Muslim.

We all die of nuclear summer/winter and the world is destroyed.
manumiglani
---------------
Lennon
The Iran president wouldn't offer himself for suicide bombing.
Nuclear power is a right to all nations, and the excuse of weapon grade uranium should be ignored unless the weapons use can be proven. Innocent until proven guilty.
SunburnedCactus
manumiglani wrote:
S3nd K3ys wrote:
Iranian President wrote:
“We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization. We must make use of everything we have at hand to strike at this front by means of our suicide operations or by means of our missiles.”


Ok so president of Iran also writes emails to you. wow, seems like a a great friendship. Embarassed

but man beware of fbi as they can caught you any time for having links with president of Iran.

also, can you share the email of president of Iran with us, i promise i will not spam. Idea

edit
removed comment that a certain country and a forum member su-cks
edit


I would stop digging your hole now, as these comments were widely reported on the news when he made them during a speech.

Read this: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38709
and this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4031603.stm

before shooting your mouth off.
Devil
alright Cuz i am a indian , i dont hate IRan ,

but just cant agree with them having nukes AT this moment , cuz their leader is freak ,

and i dont agree to the person above that he said about destroying isreal ,usa and england ,

he only mentioned destroying isreal , that too when he was addressing the youth of his country .

but the scarry part sis , after he gave this speach , he sat down with all his mullas , and i am not making this up , i have seen this video on national geografic .

HE said there was a light from heaven which picked him up ,when he said about destroying isreal , now even the mullas were scared , cuz a person like this wouldnt even mind destroying the whole world in the name of god .

but looking at the political veiw , Iran cannot have nukes ,cuz they signed the NPT ,

India or pakistan did not sign this agreement , nor did isreal .
S3nd K3ys
Devil wrote:


and i dont agree to the person above that he said about destroying isreal ,usa and england ,

he only mentioned destroying isreal , that too when he was addressing the youth of his country .

.


You don't know squat about this do you? He said it very plainly. Go read it. (And I know you'll get confused when you get to the part about the Anglo-Saxons, so I'll spell it out for you right now, the United States and England ARE the Anglo-Saxons)

manumiglani wrote:


Ok so president of Iran also writes emails to you. wow, seems like a a great friendship. Embarassed

but man beware of fbi as they can caught you any time for having links with president of Iran.

also, can you share the email of president of Iran with us, i promise i will not spam. Idea


Which oriface did you pull "email" out of? What part of PUBLICALLY didn't you understand? Seriously, can you even READ? Can you comprehend what you have read? I'm starting to wonder...
[idbi]SKi
Lennon wrote:
In europe and america we have innocent until proven guilty.
Bush, Blair and others don't seem to believe that.

Give Iran the benefit of the doubt, just keep a close eye on them.


I thought it was guilty until proven innocent...
Devil
S3nd K3ys wrote:
Devil wrote:


and i dont agree to the person above that he said about destroying isreal ,usa and england ,

he only mentioned destroying isreal , that too when he was addressing the youth of his country .

.


You don't know squat about this do you? He said it very plainly. Go read it. (And I know you'll get confused when you get to the part about the Anglo-Saxons, so I'll spell it out for you right now, the United States and England ARE the Anglo-Saxons)

...


i will stick to what i said , cuz i heard his whole speach on tv .and not read it somewhere like you . but that is also one reason i cannot provide source , he must have said to destroy usa and england , but not at the time ,when he said about removing isreal from the world map ,

Edit: here is something for u anyway

Quote:
Iran's President Ahmadinejad has called for Israel's destruction at a speech given to students. "There is no doubt that the new wave in Palestine will wipe off this stigma from the face of the Islamic world," he told a conference in Tehran called "The World without Zionism." His words were also carried in the state-run media, "Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, any who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad said. "As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,", he added speaking of the Ayatollah Khomeini.
http://www.atsnn.com/story/179560.html
S3nd K3ys
Devil wrote:

i will stick to what i said , cuz i heard his whole speach on tv .and not read it somewhere like you . but that is also one reason i cannot provide source ,



The back-peddling begins.

I CAN provide source, so why don't you sack up and debunk it? If he didn't say it, I'm sure it's on the net somewhere refuting it. If you can't debunk it, just say so. Don't start tripping backwards over yourself trying to get out of it by claiming you 'saw it on TV'.

Quote:

he must have said to destroy usa and england , but not at the time ,when he said about removing isreal from the world map ,


So you listened to him. What exactally did he mean when he said:

Quote:
We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization and for the uprooting of the Americans and the English.


and this?

Quote:
the global infidel front is a front against Allah and the Muslims, and we must make use of everything we have at hand to strike at this front, by means of our suicide operations or by means of our missiles. There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and in the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them.


Whilst you're at it, explain the poster that was on the podium he was speaking from...

nopaniers
Iran should not develop nuclear weapons. At the moment, the best way forward looks like the Russian proposal, which the Chinese also back. Under this proposal Iran would be able to reprocess its nuclear material in Russia for use inside Iran. This makes good sense, as Iran is guaranteed the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes under same treaty that bans the development of nuclear weapons in Iran: the non-proliferation treaty (NPT).

Quote:
why can't IRAN use nuclear power for its civilian use?


Iran can. But they have to make sure that technology is not used to make weapons.

Quote:
Only Usa has used nukes till now. usa is a powerhouse of nukes and wmds. so why don't they are taken into UN ?


That is true. The USA, Russia, China, France and Britain all have nuclear weapons, and are allowed to have them under the NPT (the same treaty which bans every other country, including my own, Australia, from having nuclear weapons) and therefore are not taken to the UN. Israel, Pakistan and India have them, but never signed the treaty.

The reason Iran can't have nuclear weapons has nothing to do with Ahmedinejad, or the current US government. It is because Iran agreed to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and now must live up to their word and their obligations just like every other country in the world.

In exchange for every other country agreeing not to develop nuclear weapons, the nuclear powers did agree to disarm (Article 6 of the treaty).
Quote:
Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

So in that sense, you are absolutely right: The nuclear powers have agreed to disarm (and should no longer have nuclear weapons), but they have not lived up to their obligations.
manumiglani
----------------------------
S3nd K3ys
manumiglani wrote:


i have said it before and now i am saying it again " dam media supported by usa government"

So what exactally DID he say?
manumiglani
=------------------
manumiglani
-----------
Soulfire
The problem is Iran is so dishonest and untrustworthy, we don't know what will happen... and better than taking the risk of nuclear war, we're trying to step in.

All the countries with nukes so far have been smart enough to use them only for display and not actually blast half of the world off, and I hope it never comes to that.
nopaniers
Soulfire wrote:
The problem is Iran is so dishonest and untrustworthy,


It has nothing to do with being trustworthy.

Quote:
All the countries with nukes so far have been smart enough to use them only for display and not actually blast half of the world off, and I hope it never comes to that.


The US has used nukes.
manumiglani
-----------------
Talk2Tom11
Iran, the second largest producer of oil in the world. Why do they need nuclear energy.

If it is true that they are only going for nuclear energy and not nuclear weapons, then why not follow the rules. Why is iran threatening to pull out of the nuclear treaty with the UN. Why it is being soo hostile to the UN.

Lets remember again though folks, it isn't just the US who is against Iran having nukes. It is the whole eurpoean union, china, and russia. So lets not make this just a US, Iran thing.

But i am sure in the end it will turn out just like iraq, and the rest of the world will be happy the US was the only country with balls to do something, yet blame america for invading another country at the same time.

Lets not forget, the UN voted unanimously 15-0 to take over iraq my force if they did not comply with UN resolution 1441. And they didn't, and the UN backed down.

Please don't leave the UN in charge of anything.
nopaniers
Talk2Tom11 wrote:
Iran, the second largest producer of oil in the world. Why do they need nuclear energy.


Iran also have uranium. Like every country in the world Iran knows that oil will run out. Like every country, Iran are guaranteed the right to peaceful nuclear power under the NPT.

Quote:
If it is true that they are only going for nuclear energy and not nuclear weapons, then why not follow the rules. Why is iran threatening to pull out of the nuclear treaty with the UN. Why it is being soo hostile to the UN.


According to Iran, they would like to reprocess uranium for use in nuclear power plants. That's a perfectly valid thing to want to do, and part of the peaceful nuclear cycle. The problem is that other countries would like to see them give up this right, and negotiations with the EU broke down.

Other countries, such as the US, have been threatening Iran with sanctions to pressure. Iran is demonstrating that it too can turn up the pressure. Thankfully there are other countries, like China and Russia who have viable alternatives to letting this argument turn nasty.

Quote:
But i am sure in the end it will turn out just like iraq, and the rest of the world will be happy the US was the only country with balls to do something,


I don't think you understand.

Quote:
Lets not forget, the UN voted unanimously 15-0 to take over iraq my force if they did not comply with UN resolution 1441.


1441 did not call for the use of force. The US explicitly assured other countries of that at the time (if you remember the debate) which is why the resolution passed. Resolution 1441 demanded that inspectors be allowed back into Iraq, which they were. The US invaded, despite the fact that Iraq did what was asked of them.
Purgatorios
Although President Ahmadinejad didn't make the above threats, he has threatened Israel before; the article is unsubtantiated but I found it on the MEMRI website, and the Revolutionary Guard has been from its inception a scary right-wing ultramilitant organization, independent from the regular Iranian military.

What I want to do here is look at the effect of US foreign policy on the character of the Iranian government today and consequently on worldwide safety in the event of Iranian attainment of nuclear weaponry.

For some history of US involvement pre-revolution here are some excerpts from US military involvement in Iran by the Institute for Policy Studies. Washington, 1979:
Quote:

After the coup, the United States helped the Shah consolidate his power, and the CIA and Defense Department were deeply involved in Iranian political affairs....
In the twelve years following the 1953 military coup, the United States poured over $1.2 billion in aid into Iran, almost half of which went to the Iranian Army, the Shah’s evolving power base....
Iran under the Shah was America’s number one arms customer, accounting for $18.1 billion or 25 per cent of the $71 billion in military orders placed by foreign governments under the Foreign Military Sales program between FY 1950 and FY 1977...
Not only did the Shah order vast quantities of America’s most advanced weapons, he was also acquiring the capability to produce them in Iran.
Under a multibillion-dollar industrialisation programme, the Shah commissioned US arms firms to build entire weapons factories from scratch in Iran....
These efforts came under attack from opposition elements, who argued that such plans distorted the Iranian economy at a time when basic industries and agriculture were suffering...Opposition leaders insisted in fact, that they favoured development of basic industries more suited to Iran’s long-term economic needs.


So we have a US-supported dictatorship busy militarising the country. And this from Wikipedia:

Quote:
After his return, Iran's fledgling attempts at democracy quickly descended into dictatorship as the Shah dismantled the constitutional limitations on his office and began to rule as an absolute monarch.

During his reign, the Shah received significant American support, frequently making state visits to the White House and earning praise from numerous American Presidents. The Shah's close ties to Washington and his bold agenda of rapidly Westernizing of Iran soon began to infuriate certain segments of the Iranian population, especially the hardline Islamic conservatives.


It seems to me that instead of supporting pro-democracy constitutionalist elements against right-wing Islamic nationalists, America made the collossal error of overwhelmingly backing a ruthless dictator, even training his secret police as outlined in the first article. Since with American military funding the Shah was able to dismantle constitutional limits and any pretenses of democracy the only thing the Iranian people were left with was armed, militant revolution from the right wing. Thus, hasn't the past American foreign policy of supporting an obedient autocratic regime (as is happening right now in Uzbekistan and Saudi Arabia for instance) led directly to the triumph of the Islamic right-wing over constitutionalist or democractic socialist parties? Do you think that this is related to the rise of both the Islamic right-wing and hostility to the Western world over the broader Middle East? Should this policy change?
felisleo
i still don t get why iran or any other country can t have nuclear weapons.are only the strong ones allowed to be nuclear?
dogphilosopher
There is evil in the world. There has been evil in the world. There will be evil in the world.

This is our problem as a species, not simply as a race, cultural group, or nation.

I detest all people who will seek violence as a solution to evil not because I hate them but because their ignorance prevents us from a solution.

Iran, United States, Japan, Russia, Canada, Indonesia, India, Argentina, Chile, South Africa, Mexico, France, China what difference the words. Just sounds superimposed upon suffering. I don't want to be a member of such a nation. I belong to the flesh and blood of those I see around me.

I am not disgusted with blood, until it flows in economic rivers. I am not disgusted with lies, until the people can't even see them for what they are. I am not disgusted with greed, until the greed is the only thing there is.

Forgive my excess, but sometimes I just think I should just cut my throat and be rid of it. There was a time when we were apes and did a better job. Now we are in our adolescence as a species, and if the statistics are correct, the rate of suicide is great among adolescents.

How much more must I watch. Iran wants nuclear weapons so that they can feel a security only a few other nations feel. The United States does not wish to give Iran such weapons because it compromises, in they're view, the security of the Unitied States. Most of the west agrees because they watch T.V. Simple people always being manipulated by those whose trust is a commodity of a market or religion. Quite simply, I'm just sick of it.

Let's just face it: this aint no jungle; this is worse, its a playground. The big ones prey on the small ones and the parents stand in the background and smile pretending that everything will be all right even though they know that's not the truth. As long as the conditions exist for one more fantasy, one more fantasy will exist.

In my opinion, its time for the kids to take control. To hell with creepy old men.
Related topics
No sound on a Dell Dimension 4500S
Iran Completed It's Nuclear Program
Does being pro-war contrast w/ religion (e.g. Christianity)?
Bush's Reign
to which country you like ...
Iran...war looming ?
Thoughts On The Media
USA v Canadian Candy
US forces are apparently THROWING bullets in Iraq now
India - USA Nuclear Deal
Is it a worry about Iran?
Iran and the west
Why even Liberal Pakistanies also don't like CIA's Policies?
Are you afraid of Iran shoud we start to care about them?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.