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

Skip to comments.

Hand over nuclear weapons and know-how, Iran tells Britain
Telegraph (UK) ^ | 2004-08-10

Posted on 08/10/2004 4:56:49 PM PDT by Clive

Iran has issued an extraordinary list of demands to Britain and other European countries, telling them to provide advanced nuclear technology, conventional weapons and a security guarantee against nuclear attack by Israel.

Teheran's request, said by British officials to have "gone down very badly", sharply raises the stakes in the crisis over Iran's nuclear programme, which Britain and America believe is aimed at making an atomic bomb.

Iran's move came during crisis talks in Paris this month with senior diplomats from Britain, France and Germany.

The "EU-3" were trying to convince Iranian officials to honour an earlier deal to suspend its controversial uranium enrichment programme, which is ostensibly designed to make fuel for nuclear power stations but could also be used to make fissile material for nuclear bombs. Iranian officials refused point-blank to comply, saying they had every right under international law to pursue "peaceful" nuclear technology.

They then stunned the Europeans by presenting a letter setting out their own demands.

Iran said the EU-3 should support Iran's quest for "advanced (nuclear) technology, including those with dual use" - a reference to equipment that has both civilian and military applications.

The Europeans should "remove impediments" preventing Iran from having such technology, and stick to these commitments even if faced with "legal (or) political . . . limitations", an allusion to American pressure or even future international sanctions against Iran.

More astonishingly, Iran said the EU-3 should agree to meet Iran's requirements for conventional weapons and even "provide security assurances" against a nuclear attack on Iran.

This is a reference to Israel's nuclear arsenal, believed to include some 200 warheads and long-range missiles to deliver them.

The EU-3 are still debating over how to respond, but British officials said the Iranian letter was "extremely surprising, given the delicate state of process". Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, will have to decide whether to adopt a more confrontational policy.

America is demanding that the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which meets next month, refer Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions. US officials are also openly discussing "covert" means of disrupting the Iranian nuclear programme, while Israel has openly threatened military action.

However, there were signs yesterday that the next report of Mohammed ElBaradei, the IAEA director general, may give Iran a boost.

A key mystery for the past year has been the source of traces of highly-enriched uranium (HEU) found by IAEA inspectors at several sites in Iran. Teheran claimed this was "contamination" of equipment imported from other countries, rather than proof that it had secretly made HEU.

According to diplomats, inspectors have confirmed that in at least one case the contamination did come from Pakistan, as Iran claimed.

Other contamination issues remain unresolved, and may never be settled. Moreover there are several other open questions.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iran; irannukes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-279 next last
To: Ichneumon

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1189318/posts

Now, we're talking action, dammit. Read posts #4 and #6.


241 posted on 08/11/2004 8:09:36 AM PDT by 7.62 x 51mm (• Veni • Vidi • Vino • Visa • "I came, I saw, I drank wine, I shopped")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Clive

I certainly hope Blair told them, in his British accent, to 'piss off.'

Seriously, this is disturbing. Iran needs to be next on the list.


242 posted on 08/11/2004 8:35:26 AM PDT by RockinRight (Liberalism IS the status quo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viking2002

Sure, Iran. We'll send you some nukes...

Oh, you mean you didn't want them to detonante?? Sorry...


243 posted on 08/11/2004 8:37:17 AM PDT by RockinRight (Liberalism IS the status quo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Michael121

I like your kind of thinking.


244 posted on 08/11/2004 9:13:42 AM PDT by steveegg (John F'em Ke(rr)y - I was for the war in Iraq before I was against it before I was for it..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Clive

The current greater fear is to Russia. If the Iranians get Nukes, they could pass some on to the Chechens. Russia's assets in the East would be imperiled. The Iranians, who influence western Afganistan (Herat) would be able to extend that influence. The languages are compatible, Dari, Pastun and Farsi. They would be also be able to increase their pressure towards the Kurdish area to the West as well as the Caspian to the North, possible reconstituting the ancient Medo-Persian and Bactrian Empires initially.


245 posted on 08/11/2004 9:36:39 AM PDT by Prost1 (Only muslims should have dhimmi status!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
"Sunburns?" Aka missiles?

Also, I always thought that for an ICBM it wasn't the warhead that was as complicated as either the guidance or the capability of the actual missile to make the range. Doesn't an ICBM have to go at least suborbital?

The Sunburn (3M80/3M82 Moskit, available in both sea-launched and air-launched versions) anti-shipping missile is not an ICBM (or SLBM - sea-launched ballistic missile). Rather, it is a high/low altitude cruise missile that is quite quick (Mach 3 at high altitude while it heads out toward and searches for a target, Mach 2.2 at sea-skimming altitude on its attack run). Without access to any specific arming procedures, I would suspect its arming procedures are similar to those on the TLAM-N, ALCM, or SRAM.

As for the ICBM arming question, it is commonly reported that part of the arming sequence is the detection of the vacuum of space.

246 posted on 08/11/2004 9:42:40 AM PDT by steveegg (John F'em Ke(rr)y - I was for the war in Iraq before I was against it before I was for it..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: GRRRRR

LOL!


247 posted on 08/11/2004 9:46:13 AM PDT by 7.62 x 51mm (• Veni • Vidi • Vino • Visa • "I came, I saw, I drank wine, I shopped")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

Here we go again:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1189481/posts


248 posted on 08/11/2004 9:47:31 AM PDT by 7.62 x 51mm (• Veni • Vidi • Vino • Visa • "I came, I saw, I drank wine, I shopped")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: rudypoot

"France has nothing to gain from Iran (ie no kickbacks, bribes, etc.). The only reason why the EU is doing this is because they want a diplomatic victory under their belt. Then throw it in the face of Bush claiming that the Iraq war was unnecessary because they just demonstrated it with Iran.

Remember, France is only motivated by increasing it's power. They only way it can do that is to diminish the US because they cannot afford the military route. Stoopid frogs."

***

You have to remember that for France -- and all of Western Europe -- they have spent such a paltry sum on their "armed forces" that diplomacy is the first, last, and ONLY "weapon" they have.

Which is what makes the whole idea of gaining allies to share the burden in Iraq, as Kerry wants or at least says, ridiculous. Even if all of Western Europe was chomping at the bit to put boots on the ground in Iraq, what do they have to send? Not much...

This one-dimensional foreign policy on their part reminds me of Chuck Knox, the NFL coach, who always built teams around a great running back and a mediocre-at-best passing game, in the silly assumption that they would never need to do much throwing because they would only rarely be behind in a game.

Like Chuck Knox, Europe has yet to understand that you sometimes have to go for the bomb...


249 posted on 08/11/2004 9:49:34 AM PDT by Zhangliqun (War IS the answer -- when the alternative is even worse...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Prost1
Is that why Russia has been so busily supplying Iran with nuclear technology?
250 posted on 08/11/2004 9:57:24 AM PDT by inquest (Judges are given the power to decide cases, not to decide law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: inquest

"Is that why Russia has been so busily supplying Iran with nuclear technology?"

The Russian mafia at work, most likely. Putin is not permitted to engage in Tsarist style purges, at least at the moment. Russia has muslin peace lover problems and cannot afford a Nuclear Persia anymore than the U.S., Europe or Pakistan.


251 posted on 08/11/2004 10:43:23 AM PDT by Prost1 (Only muslims should have dhimmi status!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: Prost1
So just to make sure we're clear on this: When we're dealing with Russia, we're dealing with the Russian mafia. It's the ones who actually hold real power who are the ones whose motivations we have to keep an eye out for.
252 posted on 08/11/2004 10:53:28 AM PDT by inquest (Judges are given the power to decide cases, not to decide law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: inquest

The russian black market was in place before the collapse. Overnite, there arose many russian mega millionaires who controlled industries, transportation and markets. Does anyone have a clear picture? Doubtful. Clearly, there are many there who would beat up their own mother for a $$.


253 posted on 08/11/2004 11:14:20 AM PDT by Prost1 (Only muslims should have dhimmi status!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

Let's hang him. OK first we'll try him for treason, then let's hang him.


254 posted on 08/11/2004 11:42:52 AM PDT by mindspy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
The Mullahs have been acting as nutty as Kim Jong Il as of late.......out of sheer desperation, no doubt.

In hindsight, we've learned that Kim Il-Jong was speaking from a position of strength, not desperation. I suspect the Iranian scenario is not much different. We're really in a bind here. If they have a nuke, any provocation or strike by Israel could give them the self-presumed legitimacy to use said weapon on Israel (perhaps via one of those fancy new missiles they tested yesterday). If they don't have a nuke, they could throw the region into even more chaos if they decide to make military moves on the souther Shiite "provinces" seeking to secede from Iraq (annexation, really).

The more incendiary the comments become, the closer Iran is to becoming a nuclear power (if they don't already have a black-market weapon or two)...

255 posted on 08/11/2004 11:55:03 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: johnfrink

whatever!
the history of the Isreal has prove it never take care of the international pressure when the most fundmental security interest are threatened, SS missle and long range strategic bomber accompanying the EW aircraft or camourflage countermeasures with well coodination can easily penetrate the air-defense of the Iran and the just like they hit iraqi nuke power plant in the 1980s, they will never hesitate to use military to disarm the probable emergence of WMD that can well exceed the threat posed by islamic terrorism of simply car-bombing of limited damage or international criticism. And the European Nation will fail to stop it if the Isreal is resolved, even though they feel the radical regime of the muslim world that can protect their interests there is endangered of being squeezed out by the potential competitor, they are still not enough united enough to deal with it anyway and their action will be limited to pure words of criticism,instead of military intervention whose basis is on a false alliance whose members suspect and be inconfident to one another.


256 posted on 08/11/2004 12:17:23 PM PDT by nuke scavenger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: johnfrink

whatever!
the history of the Isreal has prove it never take care of the international pressure when the most fundmental security interest are threatened, SS missle and long range strategic bomber accompanying the EW aircraft or camourflage countermeasures with well coodination can easily penetrate the air-defense of the Iran and the just like they hit iraqi nuke power plant in the 1980s, they will never hesitate to use military to disarm the probable emergence of WMD that can well exceed the threat posed by islamic terrorism of simply car-bombing of limited damage or international criticism. And the European Nation will fail to stop it if the Isreal is resolved, even though they feel the radical regime of the muslim world that can protect their interests there is endangered of being squeezed out by the potential competitor, they are still not enough united enough to deal with it anyway and their action will be limited to pure words of criticism,instead of military intervention whose basis is on a false alliances whose members suspect and be inconfident to one another on the issues closely regarding security and foriegn policies.


257 posted on 08/11/2004 12:19:23 PM PDT by nuke scavenger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clive

Hmmmm.

What will the Euro-Weenies do now???

Apparently the Iranian Ayatollahs have taken their measure of Europe and concluded that having weapons means nothing if you aren't man enough to employ them.


258 posted on 08/11/2004 12:21:33 PM PDT by ZULU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes

Visualize Tehran vaporizing under the glow of a thermonuclear detonation.


259 posted on 08/11/2004 12:31:29 PM PDT by PeterFinn (Free Tibet...from Communist China!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: francisurquhart; grizzfan

But, as I type, North Korea is testing a missile that CAN hit Israel. That isn't a worry?


260 posted on 08/11/2004 3:09:43 PM PDT by TruthNtegrity ("No man works harder for his money than he who marries it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-279 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