Obama says Iran is breaking the rules

Josh

Lifer
Mar 20, 2000
10,917
0
0
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/...ran.nuclear/index.html


PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- The United States, France and Britain have presented "detailed evidence" to the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog that "Iran has been building a covert uranium enrichment facility," President Obama said Friday.

President Obama told Iran to "take concrete steps" to show it will comply with nuclear regulations.

Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy -- all in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for a G-20 economic summit -- accused Iran of intentionally hiding its nuclear facilities from the International Atomic Energy Agency.

They threatened a stiff response if Iran fails to conform to international obligations regarding nuclear development.

Iran's newly unveiled uranium enrichment facility "is inconsistent with a peaceful (nuclear) program," Obama said. "Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow."

He called on Iran to "take concrete steps" to demonstrate it will comply with its international obligations to ensure its nuclear program is for civilian use and not a covert weapons program.

Brown said international leaders were prepared to impose "further and more stringent" sanctions against Tehran.

The "level of deception by the Iranian government" will "shock and anger the whole international community ... and harden our resolve," he said. There is "no choice but to draw a line in the sand."

Iran "is taking the international community on a dangerous path," Sarkozy said.

Iran has acknowledged the existence of a second uranium enrichment plant in a letter sent to the International Atomic Energy Agency, a spokesman for the nuclear watchdog agency said Friday.

"I can confirm that on 21 September, Iran informed the IAEA in a letter that a new pilot fuel enrichment plant is under construction in the country," agency spokesman Marc Vidricaire said.

Iran's letter stated that it would provide "further complementary information ... in an appropriate and due time," Marc Vidricaire said. In response, the IAEA has requested that Iran provide specific information and access to the nuclear facility as soon as possible.

Several diplomatic sources told CNN they were aware of the letter.

The second nuclear facility, on a military base near the Shia Muslim holy city of Qom, is thought to be capable of housing 3,000 centrifuges, not enough to produce nuclear fuel to power a reactor, but sufficient to manufacture bomb-making material, a U.S. diplomatic source who read the letter told CNN.

Iran's admission comes ahead of next week's rare meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, between Iran and the five permanent United Nations Security Council members, plus Germany.

Iran's revelation of a new nuclear site could actually "strengthen their hand" as it heads into next week's talks, according to Paul Ingram, an analyst who studies Iran and nuclear non-proliferation.

"It will be seen as an indication that they are willing to play by the rules," said Ingram, the executive director of the British American Security Information Council in London, England.

He said the timing of Iran's revelation -- in between the U.N. General Assembly sessions and the October 1 meeting -- is deliberate on Iran's part.

"This will make it more difficult to persuade them to abandon enrichment," Ingram said.

U.S. and French intelligence officials have known about the facility for several months, the source said. When Iran discovered that Western nations had knowledge of the facility, it sent the letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Iran claims its nuclear enrichment program is intended for peaceful purposes, but the international community accuses it of continuing to try to develop nuclear weapons capability. Before the new letter, it had acknowledged only a uranium enrichment plant in Natanz, which nuclear inspectors visited recently.

The United Nations Security Council has implemented sanctions against Iran for refusing to halt enrichment.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not mention the plant during his visit to New York this week for U.N. General Assembly sessions. He reiterated earlier claims that Iran has fully cooperated with nuclear inspectors.

Obama has already said that "serious sanctions" are a possibility if Iran fails to adequately address the nuclear issue.

Middle East analyst Meir Javendafar said it was "very significant" that Iran had come clean.

"When pressured the regime does show some sign of flexibility," said Javendafar, author of the book "The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the State of Iran." He said ultimately, Iran is fearful of international isolation.



Way to go Obama, stand up for the rules. That's what's up.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,118
45,125
136
Iran is certainly doing a bang up job of convincing pretty much everyone that they can't be trusted.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Obama has already said that "serious sanctions" are a possibility if Iran fails to adequately address the nuclear issue.
Glad to see Obama engaging the world stage and pressuring Iran, but what happens when sanctions alone do not achieve the desired result?

The UN is probably glad to be rid of the Bush Administration's sabre rattling and "us versus them" mentality. However, while Obama's delivery of is far more eloquent and inclusive, it is troubling that our Middle East strategy remains virtually the same.
 

BassBomb

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2005
8,390
1
81
Originally posted by: K1052
Iran is certainly doing a bang up job of convincing pretty much everyone that they can't be trusted.

I for some reason think they have no weapon, but want to egg everyone on as if they do so that the US or another nation attacks them.
Why? I don't know. Some people are purely defiant even if innocent (for example those type of people who do not comply with police enforcement when they are innocent).

 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Enforcing economic sanctions is an act of war. The sanctions placed upon Iraq helped cause the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, and was one of the main reasons given by OBL for the 9/11 attacks.

Iran is not a threat to the USA, nor was Iraq. It's a damn shame the left is as pro-war as the previous nutjobs we had in office.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,737
54,755
136
Originally posted by: bamacre
Enforcing economic sanctions is an act of war. The sanctions placed upon Iraq helped cause the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, and was one of the main reasons given by OBL for the 9/11 attacks.

Iran is not a threat to the USA, nor was Iraq. It's a damn shame the left is as pro-war as the previous nutjobs we had in office.

Uhmm, the left isn't.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,571
6,712
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Enforcing economic sanctions is an act of war. The sanctions placed upon Iraq helped cause the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, and was one of the main reasons given by OBL for the 9/11 attacks.

Iran is not a threat to the USA, nor was Iraq. It's a damn shame the left is as pro-war as the previous nutjobs we had in office.

You know nothing, bamacre. Iraq did not have a nuclear program, Iran does and one that for all the world looks to include nuclear weapons capability. What if we listen to you and some terrorist manages to smuggle Iranian bombs into some of our major cities? What if they Nuke Israel? What if Iran is willing to take the matter to Allah in a higher court.

Obama says it is unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons. How do you, on so critical an issue say he is wrong. Who are you that I should listen to you and maybe get a nuclear war going? Do you believe is self defense? Do you believe in a justifiable war? Do you wait to be hit by a nuclear weapon before you respond so that you can feel justified.

I have told you over and over that to me you are a moral coward, one who will not dirty your hands with any matter in which you feel you might sin. So why should I listen to somebody who doesn't have the guts to choose the lesser of two evils?

When the fates of millions of people are involved, why would I listen to you. Between the lunatic and paranoid neocon right and pacifist fools like you, surely there must be some middle ground, something between the slaughter of innocent people and paralysis. For the irresponsible there have to be consequences. I do not consider the hard line Mullahs of Iran to be rational. I see them as dangerous uncompromising religious fanatics, unfit to govern. I would not allow one of them to put a gun to my head. I would have them show me they can bend or I would break them if they aim clearly to break me. I do not think it is so easy to know that like you seem to, dismissing the threat as unreal.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Originally posted by: President Obama
"Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow."

Except for the five to ten countries that already have nuclear weapons, of course.

I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons as much as anybody, but this talking-down-to the U.S. continues to engage in is pretty pathetic. I guess it's better than admitting there's nothing anyone can do to stop them.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if we listen to you and some terrorist manages to smuggle Iranian bombs into some of our major cities? What if they Nuke Israel? What if Iran is willing to take the matter to Allah in a higher court.

paranoid neocon

Moonbeam has an Iranian under his bed, and needs Obama to strike it down.

How many Iranians need to die to make you feel safer, Moonie?
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,520
9,738
136
Originally posted by: Josh
Title: Obama says Iran is breaking the rules

What are we prepared to do about it?

I do not believe sanctions are the appropriate action. They will be ineffective if for no other reason than we will not blockade them. We will not crack down on trade on their border, anyone who wishes to break the sanction can do so. Where is the effectiveness in this course of action?

Iran will force our hand. Either they will have nuclear weapons or someone will have to attack. Delusions of other outcomes are simply laughable at best.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,737
54,755
136
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Josh
Title: Obama says Iran is breaking the rules

What are we prepared to do about it?

I do not believe sanctions are the appropriate action. They will be ineffective if for no other reason than we will not blockade them. We will not crack down on trade on their border, anyone who wishes to break the sanction can do so. Where is the effectiveness in this course of action?

Iran will force our hand. Either they will have nuclear weapons or someone will have to attack. Delusions of other outcomes are simply laughable at best.

The delusion that an attack will be effective is pretty laughable too. Iran will get nuclear weapons absent a full scale invasion, and we all know that won't happen. The only option available to us is the diplomatic one, no matter how small the probability of success.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,520
9,738
136
You think diplomacy is an answer to my binary choice? Please tell us how it would be effective as I just don?t see how.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Who made the rules? Why can the USA have nukes and Iran can't. Doesn't make sense to me. There is nothing that makes USA stand on moral high ground especially when THEY are the only ones to have used them. I would be happy if Iran developed nukes especially because the bully in the backyard has them and would not hesitate to use them. And if the rules mean anything why are they "allowed" to bend them while Iran is not. It's all bullshit. No wonder the world hates American policies.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,737
54,755
136
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
You think diplomacy is an answer to my binary choice? Please tell us how it would be effective as I just don?t see how.

Well I think your binary choice was wrong, so there's not much point in discussing it. I don't think diplomacy will be effective, but it's the only option we have. We're not crazy so we're not going to invade Iran, bombing their nuclear facilities will not be able to destroy enough of it to stop their nuclear program (and will probably have ruinous other consequences), and we don't just want to sit there and not try to stop them at all... so what other choice do we have?
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
More blah blah I can't even be bothered to read it. Paper tiger ftl. The UN has very little clout on enforcing its own guidelines upon members who've agreed to abide by them. I mean very fvcking little indeed. Iran is doing what North Korea, and hell every country (including the US) does: follow the UN rules when they want to and ignore them when they don't. There have never been real consequences for most infractions.

 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,118
45,125
136
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Who made the rules? Why can the USA have nukes and Iran can't. Doesn't make sense to me. There is nothing that makes USA stand on moral high ground especially when THEY are the only ones to have used them. I would be happy if Iran developed nukes especially because the bully in the backyard has them and would not hesitate to use them. And if the rules mean anything why are they "allowed" to bend them while Iran is not. It's all bullshit. No wonder the world hates American policies.

Uh...Iran voluntarily signed the NPT.

I don't think most of Iran's neighbors are all that hot on them having the bomb either.

Oh how I long for the day when the oil and ng dry up and this otherwise irrelevant region is once again relegated to the primitive ways it holds so dear.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,699
60
91
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if we listen to you and some terrorist manages to smuggle Iranian bombs into some of our major cities? What if they Nuke Israel? What if Iran is willing to take the matter to Allah in a higher court.

paranoid neocon

Moonbeam has an Iranian under his bed, and needs Obama to strike it down.

How many Iranians need to die to make you feel safer, Moonie?

I rarely agree with Moonbeam, and while I don't know you at all, so I can't judge you personally, his post is pretty much correct. I can't backup his attacks on you, but he is right about people being too scared to get their hands dirty. It's like, they cringe at the idea of murdering a few innocents even if the lives of millions are on the line.

Would I murder someone? In most situations, no. If I had to shoot my mom in the face to save a million lives? I'd let her say her prayers first. Would I feel good about doing it? I'd have shot my mother. No I wouldn't feel good. I'd feel a helluva lot worse if a million lives were lost because I couldn't pull the trigger. I'd sit and wonder about how many sons lost their mothers just because I wouldn't give up my own.

Most moderate Iranians are owning up to what their goverment is doing. They are trying to start a revolution to rid their country of tyranny before outside powers do it for them.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Enforcing economic sanctions is an act of war. The sanctions placed upon Iraq helped cause the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, and was one of the main reasons given by OBL for the 9/11 attacks.

Iran is not a threat to the USA, nor was Iraq. It's a damn shame the left is as pro-war as the previous nutjobs we had in office.

anothr Iran apologist...sheese.....move to Iran dude!!
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: President Obama
"Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow."

Except for the five to ten countries that already have nuclear weapons, of course.

I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons as much as anybody, but this talking-down-to the U.S. continues to engage in is pretty pathetic. I guess it's better than admitting there's nothing anyone can do to stop them.

No wonder you have issues with people.....
Your view points are totally wacko!!

If we followed your way of thinking then every nation should be allowed to have nuclear weapons...hmmm
 

BarrySotero

Banned
Apr 30, 2009
509
0
0
Iranian gov is very weak and near collapse (which will make them more dangerous in near term - there is no time for sanctions - especially after playing footsie with them for so long) The media has not covered Iran well. Millions of people protested in Iran Sept 18 and there was hardly any violence. Michael Ledeen has followed Iran closely for years:

September 21st, 2009 9:59 am

The Death Spiral of the Islamic Republic III

" The death of the Islamic Republic of Iran: Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, and the rest of the evil empire in Tehran, are all dead men walking. We don?t know the schedule for the funeral yet, but Iranians know it?s on the agenda. One will get you ten at my betting window that, aside from a very thin veneer of top officials (for whom there is no hope, for they will fulfill the demand of the nightly rooftop chants), anyone who is anyone in Iran today is trying to make a deal with Mousavi and Karroubi. They are all whispering that their hearts are green, and always were green.

Khamenei & Co. certainly know this, as they know they are being betrayed by some very high-ranking people. And the exodus is under way; by the end of the week we will see some important representatives of the Islamic Republic resign their posts, for they do not wish to be associated with it any longer.

Look at what didn?t happen in the streets last Friday. Not a shot was fired at the millions of demonstrators in Tehran. There are YouTubes of police fraternizing with the Greens. There are stories of Revolutionary Guardsmen helping the demonstrators, and even the Basij didn?t dare to attack or arrest, with a handful of exceptions (one of which is notable: in Tabriz, if I remember correctly, they started to round up some people, and the crowd turned on them, freed the would-be victims, and beat the Basijis to death)."


http://pajamasmedia.com/michae...slamic-republic-iii/2/
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Who made the rules? Why can the USA have nukes and Iran can't. Doesn't make sense to me. There is nothing that makes USA stand on moral high ground especially when THEY are the only ones to have used them. I would be happy if Iran developed nukes especially because the bully in the backyard has them and would not hesitate to use them.
You are so wrong! I trust the bully in the back yard more than I would trust Iran not to use them.
Sure the Bully in the backyard has them, yet the only way the bully would use them is IF they were on the verge of being annihilated!!
Obviously you are speaking nonesense!


And if the rules mean anything why are they "allowed" to bend them while Iran is not. It's all bullshit. No wonder the world hates American policies.

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,571
6,712
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if we listen to you and some terrorist manages to smuggle Iranian bombs into some of our major cities? What if they Nuke Israel? What if Iran is willing to take the matter to Allah in a higher court.

paranoid neocon

Moonbeam has an Iranian under his bed, and needs Obama to strike it down.

How many Iranians need to die to make you feel safer, Moonie?

None will die by my command and I do not know the answer to how this is best addressed. I do know that I have no reason to listen to you. You are just willing to gamble with the lives of our people. Not saying we are any more valuable than they are, just that you risk as many lives, opinion wise, as I. The difference between you and me is that you know what to do and I do not and I think the Mullahs know too.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Iranian gov is very weak and near collapse (which will make them more dangerous in near term - there is no time for sanctions - especially after playing footsie with them for so long) The media has not covered Iran well. Millions of people protested in Iran Sept 18 and there was hardly any violence. Michael Ledeen has followed Iran closely for years:

September 21st, 2009 9:59 am

The Death Spiral of the Islamic Republic III

" The death of the Islamic Republic of Iran: Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, and the rest of the evil empire in Tehran, are all dead men walking. We don?t know the schedule for the funeral yet, but Iranians know it?s on the agenda. One will get you ten at my betting window that, aside from a very thin veneer of top officials (for whom there is no hope, for they will fulfill the demand of the nightly rooftop chants), anyone who is anyone in Iran today is trying to make a deal with Mousavi and Karroubi. They are all whispering that their hearts are green, and always were green.

Khamenei & Co. certainly know this, as they know they are being betrayed by some very high-ranking people. And the exodus is under way; by the end of the week we will see some important representatives of the Islamic Republic resign their posts, for they do not wish to be associated with it any longer.

Look at what didn?t happen in the streets last Friday. Not a shot was fired at the millions of demonstrators in Tehran. There are YouTubes of police fraternizing with the Greens. There are stories of Revolutionary Guardsmen helping the demonstrators, and even the Basij didn?t dare to attack or arrest, with a handful of exceptions (one of which is notable: in Tabriz, if I remember correctly, they started to round up some people, and the crowd turned on them, freed the would-be victims, and beat the Basijis to death)."


http://pajamasmedia.com/michae...slamic-republic-iii/2/

more nonesense from the asstant village idiot!!
 

BarrySotero

Banned
Apr 30, 2009
509
0
0
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Iranian gov is very weak and near collapse (which will make them more dangerous in near term - there is no time for sanctions - especially after playing footsie with them for so long) The media has not covered Iran well. Millions of people protested in Iran Sept 18 and there was hardly any violence. Michael Ledeen has followed Iran closely for years:

September 21st, 2009 9:59 am

The Death Spiral of the Islamic Republic III

" The death of the Islamic Republic of Iran: Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, and the rest of the evil empire in Tehran, are all dead men walking. We don?t know the schedule for the funeral yet, but Iranians know it?s on the agenda. One will get you ten at my betting window that, aside from a very thin veneer of top officials (for whom there is no hope, for they will fulfill the demand of the nightly rooftop chants), anyone who is anyone in Iran today is trying to make a deal with Mousavi and Karroubi. They are all whispering that their hearts are green, and always were green.

Khamenei & Co. certainly know this, as they know they are being betrayed by some very high-ranking people. And the exodus is under way; by the end of the week we will see some important representatives of the Islamic Republic resign their posts, for they do not wish to be associated with it any longer.

Look at what didn?t happen in the streets last Friday. Not a shot was fired at the millions of demonstrators in Tehran. There are YouTubes of police fraternizing with the Greens. There are stories of Revolutionary Guardsmen helping the demonstrators, and even the Basij didn?t dare to attack or arrest, with a handful of exceptions (one of which is notable: in Tabriz, if I remember correctly, they started to round up some people, and the crowd turned on them, freed the would-be victims, and beat the Basijis to death)."


http://pajamasmedia.com/michae...slamic-republic-iii/2/

more nonesense from the assistant village idiot!!

I never worked for you - didn't even know you had assistants.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
You are just willing to gamble with the lives of our people.

That's exactly what I am not willing to gamble. How Iran, even a nuclear Iran, is a threat to the USA is beyond me. To think Iran would attempt to use nuclear weapons on Americans is insane. I don't think you are insane, that is why I am questioning what you say. Iran is practically surrounded by US-occupied countries. If I were in charge of Iran, I would want a nuke to prevent being attacked.