Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

United States Sets Iran March Deadline
Deutsche Welle - World News ^ | Feb.14, 2004

Posted on 02/14/2004 9:16:23 AM PST by nuconvert

United States sets Iran March deadline

Deutsche Welle - World News

Feb 14, 2004

The United States has given Iran a deadline to end its nuclear weapons programme. The US State Department said Iran has until a March meeting of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency to comply with promises made late last year.

If Iran is then found not to be in compliance, the United States could urge that the IAEA board refer the matter to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions or other options.

The United States accuses Iran of continuing to hide information on weapons from the IAEA.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: axisofevil; deadline; iaea; iran; mrnu; nuclear; sanctions; statedept; un; unsecuritycouncil; weapons
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
To: nuconvert
It will be interesting to see where the UN falls... interesting to see where France, Germany, and our other "allies" fall when this deadline hits.

It is very dangerous to have non-thinking people who want to kill us for the hell of it to have nukes. Allowing that to happen would be as much as allowing us to be nuked IMO.

I wonder where Russia will go with this? CHina?

21 posted on 02/14/2004 10:18:19 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GretchenEE
Ping
22 posted on 02/14/2004 10:18:24 AM PST by prairiebreeze (WMD's in Iraq -- The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Principled
It will be interesting.
Iran has been trying to gain acceptance to do business with EU. Their election debacle has so far put a hold on that. Europeans decided they'd better wait a while. Iran's elections are next week.(feb 20). The aftermath of that will be very interesting. Then a few weeks later is the deadline. Lots going on there.
Should be busy at DoctorZIn's Thread.
23 posted on 02/14/2004 10:26:59 AM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
"Getting Tough - Great News"

====

I love it when we are getting tough!

With all the flap about Iraq's missing WMD, the media is pretty much ignoring that the intel info about N. Korea UNDERESTIMATED their nuclear capability development.

"A key covert North Korean nuclear program may be more advanced than the United States had believed, US Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly has said, citing a recent confession by a Pakistani scientist that he sold nuclear technology to Pyongyang.

"... the recent confession of Pakistan's A Q Khan suggests that if anything, the North Korean HEU [highly enriched uranium] program is of longer duration and more advanced than we had assessed," Mr Kelly said. "

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1045067.htm

In these areas, you can't take chances, you always need to err on the side of caution, and we better not wait, until Iran gets as advanced as N. Korea, or it will try to dominate the entire ME.
24 posted on 02/14/2004 10:44:46 AM PST by FairOpinion (If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
"... the recent confession of Pakistan's A Q Khan suggests that if anything, the North Korean HEU [highly enriched uranium] program is of longer duration and more advanced than we had assessed," Mr Kelly said. "

Unfortunately, this seems to be the speculation with Iran also. There are serious questions being raised about whether Iran has secret uranium enrichment facility. I believe there was an article yesterday.
25 posted on 02/14/2004 10:50:10 AM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
the United States could urge that the IAEA board refer the matter to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions or other options.

Yeah, that'll bring Iran around.

26 posted on 02/14/2004 11:10:40 AM PST by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
... the United States could urge that the IAEA board refer the matter to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions or other options.

As the top Iranian government officials are red faced and holding their "guts" while ROTFLTAO.

27 posted on 02/14/2004 11:22:21 AM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus
"the United States could urge that the IAEA board refer the matter to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions or other options."
Yeah, that'll bring Iran around.

My thinking too. Unless some emphasis starts getting placed on "other options."

28 posted on 02/14/2004 11:26:26 AM PST by Eala (Sacrificing tagline fame for... TRAD ANGLICAN RESOURCE PAGE: http://eala.freeservers.com/anglican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus
Does anyone have ideas whether or not the sanctions will work with Syria and/or Iran? What exactly will be sanctioned?
29 posted on 02/14/2004 11:27:20 AM PST by John123 (Ketchup boy has been a poodle to rich women for the past 33 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Official Dem Talking Point:

"There he goes again, acting all unilateral."

30 posted on 02/14/2004 11:29:29 AM PST by Boss_Jim_Gettys (This tagline is rated NC-17.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
the United States could urge that the IAEA board refer the matter to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions or other options.

Oh no, not this sh/t again. If their nuclear program is an imminent threat, we should be taking unilateral action immediately ......and without giving any deadlines or warnings.

31 posted on 02/14/2004 11:32:17 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Follow - up story . More info:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1078190/posts
32 posted on 02/14/2004 11:35:12 AM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boss_Jim_Gettys
"There he goes again, acting all unilateral."


He may really have to this time. Remember, "we don't need a permission slip ......"

Seems we should get some support from a number of countries, but it might be less than last time. Depends on ElBaradei's report and the IAEA and how convincing they are.
33 posted on 02/14/2004 11:44:37 AM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Yes, this sh/t again, I'm afraid.

I think Bush wants to appear as though he's trying to follow the rules for a while. I just hope it isn't for too long.
34 posted on 02/14/2004 11:46:45 AM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
If Iran is then found not to be in compliance, the United States could urge that the IAEA board refer the matter to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions or other options.

Yup, this administration sure knows how to stick it to the UN.

35 posted on 02/14/2004 11:47:59 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John123; Eala; Semper Paratus
Any sanctions will be up to Security council. Iran is dependent on goods from the outside.

This would be for "show' and nothing more. To "show' other countries of the U.N. that the U.S. is playing by the 'rules'.
Since the regime doesn't care about the people, they don't really care about sanctions. But they will try to turn sentiments of the people against us if sanctions are imposed. Don't think that will be very effective. That could be a time that the populace really tries to take over.
Or we could be forced to take the next step. Or both.
36 posted on 02/14/2004 11:57:17 AM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
United States Sets Iran March Deadline

Why do we want Iran to march? And where will they march?

37 posted on 02/14/2004 12:30:19 PM PST by Lazamataz (I know exactly what opinion I am permitted to have, and I am zealous -- nay, vociferous -- in it!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
I'd like the regime to march into the Caspian sea and not stop.
38 posted on 02/14/2004 12:33:16 PM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Deutshe Welle is on shortwave radio too. It's been a while, but I think I will tune them up!
39 posted on 02/14/2004 12:44:44 PM PST by BobS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

40 posted on 02/14/2004 12:49:18 PM PST by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson