Posted on 08/01/2005 1:25:57 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
The United States has warned Iran against resuming the enrichment of uranium, saying Tehran could face sanctions from the U.N. Security Council if it resumed its nuclear fuel work.
Iran said it would resume work at the Isfahan nuclear fuel plant unless European countries come up with a new package of economic and political incentives by Monday to keep the program off-line.
But White House spokesman Scott McClellan called the threatened resumption of uranium enrichment "an unnecessary and damaging step."
"The Europeans, along with the United States, believe that Iran should adhere to the Paris agreement and continue to work with the Europeans to resolve this issue," McClellan said.
"We've made clear that if Iran is going to violate its agreement and restart uranium reprocessing and enrichment activities, then we would have to look to the next step -- and we would be talking with our European friends about the next step."
The "next step" would be to refer the matter to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions, he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
This sort of blackmail has worked in the past, and will no doubt be extensively used in the future (by nations on the verge of manufacturing nukes).
....and of course the U.S. taxpayer is stuck with the (majority of the) bill.
....AND the nations in question just go about their (nuke development) business anyway.
Ah, blackmail. Someone learned from the North Koreans.
It's like the same exact scenario is playing itself out... Iran figured it worked for NK, so why not give it a try? I wonder, will our reaction be any different, or shall we let another totalitarian government acquire nuclear weapons?
But...but...but the EU already surrender to Iran! Why isn't America?
FrontPageMagazine.COM: "SYMPOSIUM: THE SHOWDOWN" by Jamie Glazov (ARTICLE SNIPPET: "The rise to power of Islamic hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran has spelled precarious danger for the West. An Islamic fundamentalist who is determined to continue Iran's nuclear ambitions, Ahmadinejad has brought the inevitable confrontation between Iran and the U.S. to a head.") (July 29, 2005)
It's like the same exact scenario is playing itself out... Iran figured it worked for NK, so why not give it a try? I wonder, will our reaction be any different, or shall we let another totalitarian government acquire nuclear weapons?
Some how I do not see GW Bush letting Jimmy Carter talk him into giving the Iranians a nuke reactor the way Bill Clinton did on NK.
"Iran Agrees to Delay Reopening Nuclear Plant"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1454867/posts
Iran is probably still 24 months to 36 months away from a nuclear weapon -
During this time we have to press toward finding our most optimal solution to this gathering threat (which I am exactly sure the GWB WH is doing).
The using of the military option today just doesn't bode well for the whole ME region.
Note: The following post is an exact quote:
===
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1454902/posts
IRAN: Iran's Ahmadinejad to address UN
AFP ^ | 30 July 2005 | AFP
Posted on 08/01/2005 12:27:10 PM PDT by humint
Iran's Ahmadinejad to address UN on first foreign trip: reports Sat Jul 30,10:37 AM ET
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran's president-elect Mahmood Ahmadinejad plans to address the UN General Assembly in New York in September on his first official trip abroad -- despite US allegations of his role in the US embassy siege, press reports said. The ultra-conservative Ahmadinejad, who takes office on August 3 following his stunning election victory, will address world leaders on Iran's nuclear activities and its relations with the international community, the semi-official agency Fars said in a report carried by mainly conservative papers on Saturday. No confirmation could be obtained from sources close to Ahmadinejad. Iran and the United States severed ties in April 1980 after a group of radical student followers of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Khomeini stormed the US embassy in Tehran and held 52 of its staff hostage for 444 days. Diplomatic relations remain cut to this day.
However, as a president of a UN member state, Ahmadinejad is covered by diplomatic immunity. UN headquarters in New York are also considered international territory, and not property of the United States. The White House on Thursday said it has concluded that Amhadinejad was a leader of the movement behind the 1979 hostage crisis at the embassy in Tehran but is unsure whether he participated in the hostage-taking. "In terms of the president, we've looked into the allegations that were made about his involvement in the 1979 hostage crisis. We know he was a leader of the student movement that organized the attack on the embassy and the taking of American hostages," the White House said. However, according to US newspapers, a CIA photo analyst concluded that the man leading a blindfolded hostage in a widely distributed picture is not Ahmadinejad. Iranians who participated in the standoff as well as Iran's foreign ministry have also flatly denied that Ahmadinejad was involved.
Tensions are also high between Iran and the United States over the Islamic republic's nuclear program. The United States accuses oil-rich Iran of using a civilian nuclear energy program to cover up activities linked to developing atomic weapons. Tehran has rejected the charge and said it has a right to nuclear power.
U.N. Sanctions. I'll bet Iran is scared now.
At first blush it appears I have something in common with Ahblahblahjihad. He's a hardline socialist, dare I say communist. That makes Chirac an ultra-conservative too. I'm so confused...okay ...not really. ;-)
Yup.
We need to find another way of getting this done.
The lame-stream media does have a way with words.
It's too bad they don't understand history and/or the importance of accurate wording.
The only language Mullahs understand is the language of force!
Well in all fairness to the AFP, to them Laisse faire free traders would be "ultra-liberals". "Libertarian" to europeans often means leftist anarchist. Russian and Polish hardline communists are conservatives. Any sort of nationalist is labelled an ultra-conservative. I suppose a Tsarist would be a paleo-ultra-conservative. ;-)
Looks like we are threatening to hold meetings to possibly sanction, or think about possible future sanctions, or ultimately reprimands that could be recommended by the future findings of that exploratory series of meetings...And some think we arent getting tough??? Where are the real men in our government?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.