Posted on 09/06/2003 6:09:24 PM PDT by Pubbie
America will tomorrow demand that the United Nations takes urgent action to prevent Iran acquiring the atom bomb as fears mount that Teheran is on course to develop a nuclear weapons capability within two years.
United States officials will make the demand at a special meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna that has been arranged to consider a 10-page report by Mohammed al-Baradei, the agency's director-general, into the state of Iran's nuclear programme.
Washington has already expressed deep concern about the discovery of traces of weapons grade uranium found in soil samples taken from one of Iran's top secret nuclear facilities last July.
In his report, a copy of which has been obtained by The Telegraph, Mr al-Baradei lists serious concerns raised by UN weapons inspectors about the scope of Iran's nuclear programme, which Teheran continues to insist is aimed at developing a nuclear power industry.
Inspectors are particularly concerned about activity at a nuclear complex at Natanz, in central Iran, which has sophisticated equipment for enriching uranium to weapons grade standard.
Even though the complex was built five years ago, the Iranian authorities only confirmed its existence to the IAEA earlier this year after its location was revealed by Iranian exiles.
The report also details the inspectors' concerns about the development of a heavy water facility at Arak, which they believe could help Iran to manufacture weapons grade uranium.
Mr al-Baradei writes in the report's conclusion that "there remain a number of important outstanding issues, particularly with regard to Iran's enrichment programme, that require urgent resolution".
US officials, however, are concerned that Mr al-Baradei, who this year argued in favour of UN inspectors being given more time to locate Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, will try to play down the significance of the recent discoveries made in Iran.
One American closely involved in monitoring Iran's nuclear programme said: "The big difference between Iraq and Iran is that the Iranians now have the ability to develop an atom bomb within two years. The time has come to force the Iranians to come clean about their real intentions."
Although Mr al-Baradei admits that the Iranians have deployed a variety of delaying tactics to prevent UN inspectors gaining access to secret nuclear facilities, he believes that they should be given more time to comply with their obligations under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.
American officials fear that many Europeans on the IAEA's 35-member board of governors, some of whose countries have lucrative trade ties with Teheran, will back Mr al-Baradei's position.
Are you prepared to be assaulted in diverse ways?
Darn. With that attitude and degree of intelligence I thought sure they had found one in you. Finding one dumber will be difficult.
Yeah, yeah, I know, name calling. To that I add - stick it.
Can't speak for the original poster, but one thing it does is confront and defy the Left Wing tactic of language control as a device for manipulating discourse. It also summarizes feelings and beliefs for which the poster did, in fact, provide a rational defense. It is not like yelling "McCarthyite" or "racist" every time someone makes a point that you cannot address in terms of substance.
"Why exactly is it OK for us to have, develop, manufactuer, and test Nukes, and it's not OK for other Nations to do so?"
Did someone say that "other nations" should not have nuclear weapons? How did you derive this generalization from anything that has been said here? Truth is, it's a strawman because it misrepresents the opposing viewpoint.
I'm not sure how knowledgeable you are about history, but there is some precedent for this seemingly unfair and arrogant standard of ours. During the early 1940s, as you may remember, the United States developed an atomic bomb. This effort was successful, as every lefty knows even if he or she does not otherwise know what century these events occurred in, or whether Attilla the Hun was a Republican.
At the same time, National Socialist Germany, a sovereign nation whose scientists actually invented nuclear fission, also sought to develop a nuclear bomb. The United States and its allies, Great Britain and Norway, went to some length to sabotage and disrupt this program, including (oh, the horror) a mass bombing raid that killed a number of innocent civilians. Did we have the right to do this? Are you willing to take responsibility if an Iranian nuclear weapon goes off in New York or Chicago?
"But you still didn't explain this in such a way that didn't include editorializing.
Why should the poster not editorialize? Is this forbidden? By whom?
"So, what you're saying is that we are essentially the world's policemen, and that the rest of the world has to answer to us, or face a pre-emptive strike against them if they don't bow to our demands?"
He didn't say that....and this kind of demonizing authoritarian strawman contributes what to the discussion?
That is exactly what we must do. That is what we are obliged to do. We simply must keep this technology from spreading to these rogue states.
We have no real choice, and money is no (or should be no) object.
The American agenda, must be one of containment. If a nation seeks to obtain nuclear weapons, they must be clear in the knowledge that they do so at the peril of their very existence.
What the heck is the problem with that notion?
What the eff? Are we supposed to allow these primitives to have their own nuclear version of our second amendment?
Been on the drawing board for years.
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.