Posted on 04/26/2006 12:23:30 PM PDT by familyop
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran vowed on Wednesday to strike at U.S. interests worldwide if it is attacked by the United States, which is keeping military options open in case diplomacy fails to curb Tehran's nuclear program.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made the threat two days before the U.N. nuclear watchdog reports on whether Iran is meeting Security Council demands to halt uranium enrichment.
Iran says it will not stop enrichment, which it says is purely for civilian purposes and not part of what the United States says is a clandestine effort to make atomic bombs.
"The Americans should know that if they assault Iran their interests will be harmed anywhere in the world that is possible," Khamenei was quoted as saying by state television.
"The Iranian nation will respond to any blow with double the intensity," he said.
Washington, backed by Britain and France, has been pushing for sanctions if, as it expects, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that Iran has flouted U.N. demands.
But Russia and China, the U.N. Security Council's other two veto-holding permanent members, oppose any embargo.
Iran's nuclear energy head, Gholamreza Aghazadeh, held talks with IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei in Vienna on Wednesday.
"The talks were encouraging," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, told Reuters, adding the two sides discussed ways to resolve outstanding issues with the IAEA. He gave no details.
NO TIME
But a Vienna-based diplomat said before the meeting it would be too late to alter decisively the IAEA report, due to be submitted to the Security Council by Friday, because inspectors would not have time to verify issues.
"All ElBaradei can do is note any information received and say he could not assess whether it was significant," said the diplomat, who asked not to be named.
ElBaradei visited Tehran this month but his proposal that Iran "pause" enrichment was rebuffed, diplomats have said.
British Foreign Minister Jack Straw sought to enlist China's backing on Wednesday, saying Beijing should use its growing diplomatic muscle to solve disputes with international partners.
"China's support for this goal, as a permanent member of the Security Council, has been valuable already and will be increasingly crucial in securing international consensus in the face of Iran's intransigence," Straw said in London.
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Tuesday it was time the Security Council drafted a Chapter 7 resolution.
This would be binding under international law and could lead to sanctions or even military intervention, although another resolution would be required to specify either step.
In response to the U.S. refusal to rule out military action, Iran has warned Washington that its forces in the region were vulnerable. Iran's war games in the Gulf this month were widely seen as a veiled threat to a vital oil shipping route.
"The security of the Persian Gulf is very well tied up to the world's economic affairs and it would be quite natural for Iran not to sit idle vis-a-vis any military adventure," Iranian legislator Alaeddin Broujerdi told reporters in London.
IRANIAN VOW
Iran said on Tuesday it would suspend relations with the IAEA if sanctions were imposed. Diplomats said this could mean withdrawing from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday reiterated his view Iran could review its NPT and IAEA commitments if it saw no dividends from abiding by international protocols.
"We hope they fulfil their duties and make it unnecessary for the Islamic Republic of Iran to reconsider its relations with them," Ahmadinejad said.
Although Iran says it bases nuclear policy on the NPT, it pulled out of the treaty's Additional Protocol -- which allows snap inspections of atomic facilities -- in February after the IAEA referred its nuclear file to the Security Council.
Iran often says it does not benefit from the NPT's entitlement to shared technology, but Western diplomats say it must prove its goals are peaceful to qualify for this.
The IAEA has said that after three years of investigation it still cannot confirm that Iran's aims are entirely peaceful, although it has found no hard proof of a military program.
The agency points to gaps in its information, such as the status of Iran's research into P-2 centrifuges that can enrich uranium faster than the P-1 units it now operates.
(Additional reporting by Parisa Hafezi in Tehran, Mark Heinrich in Vienna and Katherine Baldwin in London)
All these guys do is threaten us! How do they find time to do anything else?
...some downplaying in the piece, BTW, and written from a British perspective.
Maybe Iran will back down after being attacked, but because of these threats I have always said we have to be prepared to defeat them outright and effect regime change. After we defeat Iran I don't think there is a major state sponsor of terrorism left standing.
"The Iranian nation will respond to any blow with double the intensity," he said.
______________________________________________________
Nuh uh....we triple dog dare ya.
I won't be really scared until they threaten to roast our bellies in the fires of hell.
Syria still is a major state sponsor of Terrorism. But with 4 of 5 out of the way, Syria just might do it's own cleanup.
"If, if America doesn't stop falsely accusing us of making nuclear weaponry with our completely peaceful nuclear power generation capabilities, we're gonna NUKE THEM!!"
Yeah. That's a pantsload of intelligence right there. Can we attack them for being stoopid?
Let's hear what they have to say after Mr. Ahmadinejad is turned into a radioactive cinder.
They've been behind attacks against us since 1979, Our embassy, they fund Hezbollah, how many attacks do you need?
When I think of British perspective I immediately recall the episode of Band of Brothers where the fine English chap advises the US grunt that he couldn't possibly fire a blind shot through a building to get to an imaginary tank. Of course the imaginary tank ends up utterly destroying Mr. political correctness.
On could surmise were skeered. What else can it be. These monkeys have been flinging poo at us in earnest since the late 70's. Guilty conscience? I don't get it.
How about we just negate their air defenses and let Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, et al do the actual strikes.
He had already said he had 40,000 people in the western world planted to become homoside bombers when he calls for it.
That tole me he already declared war by having his troops in our country already.
Time to assasinate the guy, he declared war already by what I hear.
Bin Laden did this with Clinton who did nothing. We need to learn from that lesson.
On 9/12, we knew that the people that attacked us were loosely scattered, hard to find, and didn't per se belong to any one country. So it took us a while to develope someplace in middle east where we could slowly draw them in over time, pulled by their fanatical and stupid devotion to a cause that they were willing to die for, and oblige them.
Before you come knocking around our neighborhood making a lot of noise, you crazy old windbag, remember...we know where you live. Two words, Ayatollah...green glass.
I just pray to God (the real one) that all this comes to a head in the next two years. If the cards fall wrong and America continues going back to sleep on the couch, then the next guys will send Iran flowers and candy and beg them not to hurt us again.
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.