 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
!
Posted on 08/11/2005 1:28:27 PM PDT by ex-Texan
Iran rejected a resolution from the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency urging it to freeze a uranium processing program, and vowed to become a nuclear fuel exporter within the next decade.
The resolution ``is a vote of no-confidence in the agency,'' said the Middle Eastern country's chief delegate to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Cyrus Nasseri, at a press conference today in Vienna. ``It is absurd.''
The IAEA's 35-member board of governors earlier passed a resolution drafted by European diplomats criticizing Iran's resumption of uranium processing and calling on the Islamic government to freeze its nuclear fuel program. The U.S. and its European allies want to stop Iran from pursuing research efforts that may lead to the building of a nuclear weapon.
The resolution ``expresses serious concern'' and ``urges Iran to re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related activities'' and allow the IAEA to put back seals on equipment at a plant in central Iran, according to the text. It asked IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei to report on Iran's compliance by Sept. 3. French, German and U.K. diplomats wrote the measure.
The document ``shows that the international community is united in determining that Iran move off the dangerous course that it is on,'' said the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA, Greg Schulte.
I await Pelosi to come out and call W back from "his Texas vacation" to deal with this.
Ah, so Iran will send nukes to Gaza.
It won't be overly forceful though or China and Russia will veto it.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
!
Iran plans to get the bomb, they are fanatics, that is one who can't change their mind and won't change the subject.
Iran is making Pres. Bush look more like a monkey each passing day.
I see no benefit to waiting at this point, except to get our strike assets in place.
Pres. Bush vowed that Iran would not develop nukes.
They are getting closer by the day, openly.
With this news can everyone now agree that the U.N., when it is not just out and out anti-American and anti-Semitic, is simply the most incompetent body ever created by man?
I can just see after an Iranian nuke goes off on U.S. soil, El Baradei says "Well, I guess they had nukes after all" All the while the security council will vote to block us from retaliating. Hell some members may even vote to attack us when we do retaliate.
If Iran gets nukes, the war on terror is over, unless your prepared to destroy civilization. Thank God He has a plan to stop fallen man from taking the wide path to destruction.
It looks like NATO has some firm intelligence about Iran that has brought Europe around to our point of view on Iran. Just the other day, Fischer of Germany said he didn't want this crisis to end with a "fatal conclusion." I think that was an indirect reference to a crushing military strike on Iran by NATO that would take out the Iranian theocracy permanently. This could also be one reason why we're making such a big effort to improve relations with India. We need them on our side in this crisis if at all possible. India is primarily a Hindu nation and they fear the emergence of Iran as a nuclear-armed adversary.
The Europeans strongly prefer diplomacy, but they're not suicidal and they will not accept the risk of Iranian nuclear missiles pointed at Europe. They're liberal over in Europe, but they're also smart people and they have their limits. They know that their way of life cannot continue as it is with Iranian nuclear missiles aimed at them. They know that before long Iran would begin to use those missiles to extort endless concessions from Europe and to tell Europe how to run its affairs. That scenario is unacceptable to the Europeans and Iran needs to figure this out fairly soon, otherwise they're ultimately going to get hit with thousands of precision-guided bombs in a devastating NATO attack that will remove the evil Iranian regime.
I forgot to mention that the bigger tactical threat from Iran is not nuclear missiles, but the threat of Iran providing nuclear weapons to terrorist groups which would smuggle the nukes into Europe or America. Then when the nukes are detonated and wipe out a few cities, the Iranians could deny responsibility and force NATO into a costly MAD scenario: NATO could not launch a first strike against Iran before some Iranian nuclear missiles were fired at Europe. This is the horrnedous threat posed by Iranian nukes, and the Europeans national security leaders understand this as well as we do. The European people don't understand this as well as the American people (yet), but they can be educated quickly and they will back military action if such action is necessary. The alternative would open the door to absolute chaos and mass destruction in the civilized world.
They believe they can prevent nuclear proliferation by mentally being firmly against it, by writing strident leading editorials, by signing large checks, and by willingly undergoing any humiliation and contorting themselves into any rhetorical pretzel the operation requires.
They can't. None of the expedients they reach for is capable of effecting the end they have in view. And none of them are prepared to actually do what that end requires. European politicians consider actions for which they are scolded in the press nearly physical impossibilities. You can count the exceptions on one hand, through their entire modern history (and most of those are Brits, mostly straddling US and European opinion).
The Iranians have lied to them consistently for 17 years. Their reaction is to make them large offers in return for new promises to lie to them again, when they don't believe a word the Iranians say. This is not a rational operation aimed at a material end. It is Kabuki theater for the writers of leading editorials, an attempt to get things off the front pages and look responsible for a little while longer.
They are willing to move inches towards real action only because they know there are lots of inches left, and they can always go to half inches, or stop altogether and just cave in. When push comes to shove, they can count on somebody threatening to veto whatever.
At one minute to midnight, the Iranians will have a choice - lie and take a check, and get nukes a little later, or go ahead and test. After either decision, the Europeans will say it is impossible to do anything. In case of a new lie, they will play "let's pretend" again until it is uncovered again. In the case of a test, they will say it is too late and they are deterred.
The entire procedure is forseeable. But they no more accept it as real than you accept their madness as real. They live in their wishes, comforted by the delusion that they are not free to deviate from the demands of writers of leading editorials, so whatever disasters result are not their fault.
And if you think they can't possibly keep up such delusions until millions die, then look at the Congo and Sudan, where millions and hundreds of thousands have died and they have played "let's pretend" and "not our fault". Look at Bosnia in their backyard for a decade. Look at their lost wars in the periphery throughout the cold war, their caving in to Algerian terrorists, their withdrawal from dominant positions across the entire globe, their dismantling of their militaries.
You say they remember WW II and it makes them eager to exhaust the resources of diplomacy. As a fact, none of them know WW II, and its lessons are quite the reverse. In the end, only the tendency of unjust men to fight amongst themselves, and our belated help, rescued their entire civilization from self destruction. Precisely through their unwillingess to face unpleasant realities about ruthless tyrants. They were much, much more rational them, and still had men of action to turn to when they eventually decided they needed them.
Now they have none. Name a European general.
They aren't going to to a blessed thing. Iran will get nukes unless we stop them. The Brits might come along, though there is no chance whatever they would do the slightest thing unless we first insist on it and tell them we are going to do it whether they help or not. The rest of them will be promising Iran large checks to tell new lies the day before Iran sets off its first nuke, and appeasing them the day after.
The situation with Iran is different from the Congo, Sudan, and Bosnia, because none of those countries posed any kind of direct threat to the lives of European people. But intermediate-range nuclear missiles in the hands of the Iranian mullahs would be a massive and direct threat to Europe. So I would expect the Europeans to take this issue much more seriously than the Congo or Bosnia. There will be political hacks like Schroder who will try to gain votes by publicly rejecting the option of military force against Iran. But when elections are over and the Iranian crisis reaches a full boil in a couple of years, I would expect NATO to solidly support a military strike if negotiations fail to stop the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
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.