U.S. Says Iran Thumbs Nose at Nuke Talks

[truthpusher]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/08/08/national/w143852D47.DTL&feed=rss.news

U.S. Says Iran Thumbs Nose at Nuke Talks
-----------------------
- By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer
Monday, August 8, 2005
(08-08) 14:38 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --
-----------------------
Iran is "thumbing its nose" at a proposed international deal on its nuclear ambitions, the State Department said Monday, but the Bush administration seemed in no hurry to invoke punitive economic sanctions.

Iran resumed uranium conversion activities at its Isfahan nuclear facility, a step that Europeans and the United States have warned in the past would prompt them to seek United Nations sanctions.

"This is Iran thumbing its nose at a productive approach" by European negotiators, State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said.

Neither Ereli nor White House spokesman Trent Duffy would directly answer questions about whether the United States intends to push for sanctions now. Both said the U.S. position "is well known," but they would not restate that position.

Ereli said Washington will support European efforts "to get this process back on track," although it is not clear that negotiators have many options if Iran refuses to budge.

"I don't want to predict an outcome of what will happen and when," Ereli said.

(snip)

complete story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/08/08/national/w143852D47.DTL&feed=rss.news

[gratuitous]

1. Send in the troops, George

That is, if you have any to spare.

[deminks]

2. I wonder if he really needs any

troops for his pre emptive strike.

:yoiks:

[12345]

3. why waste the troups when you can nuke them?

[Tempest]

4. That's real intelligent, NOT!

Iran is the 3rd largest producer of oil in the world.

Not only will you lose Iran's oil, you'll lose the entire Middle East's oil as countries fight each other over what's left.

And at this point, the U.S. would lose badly to the Russia/China/India axis.

[okieinpain]

7. and I'm pretty sure that with a country the size of iran, they've

hidden some of those cruise missiles away. they won't need nuclear weapons to stop the flow of oil from some of those saudi refineries. can you say 150 a barrel, what would that translate into for a gallon of gas 6, 7, dollars a gallon.

yeah george go ahead and a take a shot, I'm pretty sure some of the neo-cons, have told him that the iranians will greet us with rose pedals.

[Tempest]

9. Iran has the 4th largest military in the Middle East

They have a modern military with 2.5 million soldiers.

They've been purchasing the most modern weapons in the world from Russia and China during the last two years.

Our troops wouldn't be safe anywhere in the Middle East, nor would Saudi Arabia or Kuwait.

[okieinpain]

11. nuke or no nuke, I just don't see how taking on iran would be

a easily done task. we controlled the flow of weapons into iraq for what almost ten years, and look how well we're doing there.

[Deja Q]

6. We nuke Iran. Iran's neighbors might nuke us in return...

or at least our local interests...

They know nukes mean the end of EVERYTHING.

Should one country opt to use them, why would they then cower? They know all is lost. They would then use them too.

Nukes mean the end of all.

Literally.

[Deja Q]

5. Well, if the Europeans aren't keen on Iran, will they send troops?

The US is rather in a bind right now and, quite frankly, there actually is a valid concern for Iran right now. Compared to Iraq, certainly.

No DUer has any real power or say in the matter; apart from using DU as a catharsis. I'm just hoping or the best. That another war is unnecessary, but would Iran truly be able to topple the West?

[Tempest]

8. Britain was the only country to send any troops in quantity

And with the number of seats Blair's party lost in the last election, I doubt he's too keen on following Bush into Iran.

Even poodles abandon their masters when they've been mistreated.

[termo]

23. no

Iran or North Korea, make your choice... but that is the end of the last superpower.
:nopity:

[niceypoo]

10. When a story starts with "US Says" I disregard it

as hooey.....

[Hobarticus]

12. US says Iranian Olympic athletes use steroids

or some other bullshit trumped-up accusation. US vows nuklar revenge.

[eissa]

13. If there is one thing

this administration knows well, it's how to thumb their nose!

Pot meet kettle.

[truth2power]

14. So what? Bush thumbs his nose at the American people...

AND gives them the finger. Sheesh!!

[drduffy]

15. this may have been mentioned but

don't forget the 500 bunker buster bombs sold to Israel a few months back. How hard would it be for Israel to install small nukes?

pre-emptive nuke use was ok'd by bushco.

cheney has ok'd 'bomb Iran' if new 9/11 occurs, regardless of proof re: Iran's involvement.

think of the need for yet another 'New Pearl Harbor' to justify attacking Iran and simultaneously imposing martial law in US.

DU writers have already noted these points (can't remember specifics) but I believe they are correct.

[rodeodance]

16. these boys (and a gal) are playing dangerous games.

[Canuckistanian]

17. Careful, Chimpy, these guys can shoot back....

And you're not even secure in Iraq yet. The last thing you need is a Third Front and you'll get it if a single bomb drops on Iran....

[sintax]

18. Iran risks showdown as work at atomic site resumes

Iran risks showdown as work at atomic site resumes

Ian Traynor and Ewen MacAskill
Tuesday August 9, 2005
The Guardian

Iran risked the collapse of almost two years of negotiations with Britain, France and Germany over its suspect nuclear programme when it yesterday restarted work at a key atomic site.

Its action brought closer the prospect of a showdown with the US, which wants to see Iran referred to the UN security council and economic sanctions imposed.

The restarting of uranium conversion in the southern city of Isfahan was criticised by the Foreign Office, which described events yesterday as being of deep concern.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1545413,00.html

[splat@14]

19. Bush taught them well; either get nukes, or we'll attack to keep `em out.

[upi402]

20. USA, Israel, Iran -all want a diplomacy failure

If diplomacy fails, Israel and USA get to screw up an Arab state with "war" and Iran gets to ignite the holocaust against the great Satan.

Fools rush in...

[splat@14]

21. .....and we have the king of fools in Crawford. Welcome to DU upi!

[daleo]

22. Bush's invasion of Iraq ensured many country's would try for nuclear bombs

How else can they protect themselves from a rogue U.S.?

The inventors of the atom bomb said that any reasonably advanced state could make nuclear weapons in five years or so if they set their mind to it (they were thinking of the Soviets at the time, but Iran would certainly qualify now). The science and technology are just not that difficult (in principle).

The main thing that prevented proliferation was a certain level of trust that nuclear states would not use their advantage to dominate others. Imperfect as that idea was, Bush finished it off.

I recommend "Pandora's Keepers", which I read on the weekend, if anyone wants to learn more about this.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

24. Meanwhile, Haliburton sells them nuke equipment

Ho Hum

[Strelnikov_]

25. This Is Directly Attributable To The Chimps Military Failure

Once military force is used, the threat of force no longer has the same effect. Therefore, the use of military force is always a failure.

The fact that Iran is now thumbing its nose at the US is an indicator of the deteriorating condition of our position in Iraq. Iran now knows exactly how to 'beat' the neo-cons. The 'shock and awe' of the 1991 Gulf War is a distant memory.

They will absorb any bombing, just like Iraq did in 1991, in the knowledge that we no longer have the ability to mount ground operations against them. Bombing of Iran, by the US or, worse, Israel, will simply gain them more allies from around the Islamic, and probably wider, world resulting in a tactical loss but a strategic victory for them.

It is beginning to appear that the Iraq invasion will go down in history as a parallel to Stalin's invasion of Finland. When Hitler observed the apparent weakness of the previously unassailable Soviet military, he was emboldened to attempt Operation Barbarossa. Like Hitler, the Iranian leadership is now emboldened by what they have observed.

And all this is due to the complete incompetence of the Chimp in his pursuit of this war. If they had decided Iraq must be taken, why did they not use adequate troop levels or follow the advise of State Department experts? Why did they rush to set up a wild west of crony capitalism, thus alienating most of the population?

Incompetence rising to the level of treason. Yes, treason, freepers. Not the Ann Coulter 'cause we don't like what they say' treason. I am talking the 'place the entire nation in danger' treason.