Pakistan helps U.S. look into Irans nuke program.

[maluckey]

Pakistan helps the U.S.

This is yet another example of the enemy of my enemy is my friend, or keep your friends close...your enemies closer. Our newfound relationship with Pakistan has been yielding good fruit.

 

[conjur]

PBS Frontline World just did a piece on Iran. The video isn't up yet but here's the article:
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/thestory.html

Re: Pakistan, though, I still harbor doubts about the validity of some of their info and definitely harbor fears that they'll eventually stab us in the back (esp. if Musharaf falls from grace.) But, I guess that's why Wolfowitz's Citibank buddy is now the Prime Minister in Pakistan.

 

[maluckey]

For sure pakistan is a fair weather friend at best. The information is foolprof as far as the origin of the refined Uranium. The unique signature is better than DNA to identify the origin.

Pakistan wouldnto be so friendly if Al-Queda had not twice attemted to kill the Pakistani leader.

 

[rickn]

Irans nuke program is for peaceful purposes, there's no evidence to suggest otherwise. do they have contingency plans? probably. Wouldnt you if all your neighbors were being invaded & occupied by foreign powers? And Pakistan is hardly a trustworthy partner. Our partnership will come back and bite us in the ass in 20yrs

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: rickn
Irans nuke program is for peaceful purposes, there's no evidence to suggest otherwise. do they have contingency plans? probably. Wouldnt you if all your neighbors were being invaded & occupied by foreign powers? And Pakistan is hardly a trustworthy partner. Our partnership will come back and bite us in the ass in 20yrs

Remember, Bush says; Muslims must not have atomic power, because muslims are evil by nature.

 

[maluckey]

Irans nuke program is for peaceful purposes, there's no evidence to suggest otherwise. do they have contingency plans? probably. Wouldnt you if all your neighbors were being invaded & occupied by foreign powers? And Pakistan is hardly a trustworthy partner. Our partnership will come back and bite us in the ass in 20yrs

No proof of that statement as of yet. There is proof when the samples are processed though. We can only hope that it IS peaceful. It would really help their economy and stabilize the region even further.

I cannot believe without Irans compliance, which is reticent at best, belligerent at worst.

Remember, Bush says; Muslims must not have atomic power, because muslims are evil by nature.

We are speaking of Iran, it's nuclear program, and the information provided by Pakistan. Troll somewhere else.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: maluckey
Remember, Bush says; Muslims must not have atomic power, because muslims are evil by nature.

We are speaking of Iran, it's nuclear program, and the information provided by Pakistan. Troll somewhere else.[/quote]

His argument speaks to that, whether you agree with it or not. Why? Because it offers a reason why Bush opposes Iranian nuclear power, which you agree is what we are speaking of.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: maluckey

Originally posted by: Forsythe
Remember, Bush says; Muslims must not have atomic power, because muslims are evil by nature.

We are speaking of Iran, it's nuclear program, and the information provided by Pakistan. Troll somewhere else.

His argument speaks to that, whether you agree with it or not. Why? Because it offers a reason why Bush opposes Iranian nuclear power, which you agree is what we are speaking of.

The reason is, i don't see why they should not be allowed to enrich uranium. I have the feeliong that it's only because it's a muslim country, as i see no other problems with it.

 

[maluckey]

His argument speaks to that, whether you agree with it or not. Why? Because it offers a reason why Bush opposes Iranian nuclear power, which you agree is what we are speaking of.

I see you like to throw around "straw man" labels. Enjoy being labeled as a perp. on this one. I'll play along though. Find just one instance where ANY quote attributed to Bush says that he is opposed to nuclear power in Iran or any other country. There isn't one. Stop posting oppinions as factual information. At least Forsythe stated his as an opinion:

The reason is, i don't see why they should not be allowed to enrich uranium. I have the feeliong that it's only because it's a muslim country, as i see no other problems with it.

Your feelings are noted, but there is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that disagrees unless they can demonstrate peaceful intentions.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: maluckey
I see you like to throw around "straw man" labels. Enjoy being labeled as a perp. on this one. I'll play along though.

Huh?

Find just one instance where ANY quote attributed to Bush says that he is opposed to nuclear power in Iran or any other country.

I never made that claim.

There isn't one. Stop posting oppinions as factual information.

I haven't even posted an opinion about Iranian nukes in this thread, only that your attack on Forsythe, suggesting his statement about GWB was an off-topic troll, was not sound.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: maluckey

His argument speaks to that, whether you agree with it or not. Why? Because it offers a reason why Bush opposes Iranian nuclear power, which you agree is what we are speaking of.

I see you like to throw around "straw man" labels. Enjoy being labeled as a perp. on this one. I'll play along though. Find just one instance where ANY quote attributed to Bush says that he is opposed to nuclear power in Iran or any other country. There isn't one. Stop posting oppinions as factual information. At least Forsythe stated his as an opinion:

The reason is, i don't see why they should not be allowed to enrich uranium. I have the feeliong that it's only because it's a muslim country, as i see no other problems with it.

Your feelings are noted, but there is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that disagrees unless they can demonstrate peaceful intentions.

Then again, i see no reason why they should keep it to peaceful intentions. I mean, Bush has nuclear weapons.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: maluckey

His argument speaks to that, whether you agree with it or not. Why? Because it offers a reason why Bush opposes Iranian nuclear power, which you agree is what we are speaking of.

I see you like to throw around "straw man" labels. Enjoy being labeled as a perp. on this one. I'll play along though. Find just one instance where ANY quote attributed to Bush says that he is opposed to nuclear power in Iran or any other country. There isn't one. Stop posting oppinions as factual information. At least Forsythe stated his as an opinion:

The reason is, i don't see why they should not be allowed to enrich uranium. I have the feeliong that it's only because it's a muslim country, as i see no other problems with it.

Your feelings are noted, but there is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that disagrees unless they can demonstrate peaceful intentions.

Did Iran sign such a treaty?

As to the topic of this thread, I'm glad we're looking into this, having a complete idea of the situation before we do anything is a good plan I think. I still don't trust Pakistan, but that doesn't mean they can't be useful.

 

[maluckey]

India, Israel and Pakistan are the only three that I know of that didn't sign the treaty.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: maluckey

His argument speaks to that, whether you agree with it or not. Why? Because it offers a reason why Bush opposes Iranian nuclear power, which you agree is what we are speaking of.

I see you like to throw around "straw man" labels. Enjoy being labeled as a perp. on this one. I'll play along though. Find just one instance where ANY quote attributed to Bush says that he is opposed to nuclear power in Iran or any other country. There isn't one. Stop posting oppinions as factual information. At least Forsythe stated his as an opinion:

The reason is, i don't see why they should not be allowed to enrich uranium. I have the feeliong that it's only because it's a muslim country, as i see no other problems with it.

Your feelings are noted, but there is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that disagrees unless they can demonstrate peaceful intentions.

Did Iran sign such a treaty?

As to the topic of this thread, I'm glad we're looking into this, having a complete idea of the situation before we do anything is a good plan I think. I still don't trust Pakistan, but that doesn't mean they can't be useful.

Iran is a signatory to the NPT, but they can easily just drop out of it.

 

[maluckey]

According to the treaty:

Non Nuclear States

1. must not build, acquire, or possess nuclear weapons;

2. may research, produce, and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes; and

3. must accept safeguards (audits and intrusive on-site monitoring) on all of their nuclear activities and materials to verify they are not being used for nuclear weapons.


Iran is guilty of obstructing the spirit of the three tenets. It may be in violation, but that is yet to be proven, though in contention.