Skip to comments.
ElBaradei: West may have to accept atomic Iran
ynetnews ^
| 02.20.06, 09:1
| na
Posted on 02/20/2006 4:26:30 AM PST by Flavius
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
yeah, shocking
1
posted on
02/20/2006 4:26:33 AM PST
by
Flavius
To: Flavius
I can accept it if Iran can accept glowing in the dark.
2
posted on
02/20/2006 4:27:42 AM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Never a minigun handy when you need one.)
To: Flavius
Appeasement has historically worked so well with despots and dictators. /sarcasm
3
posted on
02/20/2006 4:29:46 AM PST
by
IamConservative
(Who does not trust a man of principle? A man who has none.)
To: Flavius
Iran - "Ok, we promise to only produce enough plutonium for a small device. One that will only destroy half of Israel. We'll build a few of these so we don't miss a thing."
Israel will never let the Iranians get to this point. No matter what world opinion says. A terrorist Iran with the bomb is a danger to us all. Sooner or later either Israel or Bush will have the nads to use force to stop Iran......no matter world opinion.
4
posted on
02/20/2006 4:31:34 AM PST
by
Pistolshot
(Condi 2008.<------added January 2004. Remember you heard it here first)
To: IamConservative
5
posted on
02/20/2006 4:32:10 AM PST
by
bill1952
("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
To: Flavius
Yes, just plain shocking I tell you. Its so patently clear to me that a guy with a name like el baradai has no vested interest in promoting islamic nuclear plans.
To: Flavius
close the fricken UN before they kill us all
7
posted on
02/20/2006 4:34:07 AM PST
by
sure_fine
(*not one to over kill the thought process*)
To: Flavius
Sorry, the US isn't buying a UN approved pig in a poke.
8
posted on
02/20/2006 4:34:26 AM PST
by
hershey
To: Flavius
ElBaradei is only looking out for his wifes family
9
posted on
02/20/2006 4:34:50 AM PST
by
sure_fine
(*not one to over kill the thought process*)
To: Flavius
To: Flavius
I could accept a free, pro-west, atomic Iran with millions of mass conversions to CHRISTIANITY...
11
posted on
02/20/2006 4:38:26 AM PST
by
ovrtaxt
(Join the FR folding team!! http://vspx27.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teampage&teamnum=36120)
To: Flavius
in exchange for guarantees of no full nuclear fuel production that could enable diversions into bomb-making Reuters What are bomb-making Reuters? Is a bomb-making Reuter different from a non-bomb-making Reuter?
Are they similar to bomb-throwing Reuters? There certainly have been a lot of them, in recent years...
( /humor)
12
posted on
02/20/2006 4:40:27 AM PST
by
Old Sarge
(In a Hole in the Ground, there Lived a Fobbit...)
To: Flavius
Stand back UN weanies! But really, I'm afraid all the political attacks may delay action against Iran from the Bush Administration.
To: son of caesar
El Baradei does a good job.
Until now the IAEAs job is just to keep track of things. It's not their job to topple regimes or to cripple reactors.
That would be our job if Ahmedinedjad is really as mad as he behaves.
Until now he's playing it quite convincing.
14
posted on
02/20/2006 4:41:59 AM PST
by
globalheater
(There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare - Sun Tzu)
To: Flavius
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradeiAnd let's make Howard Stern the new Pope while we're at it.
To: Flavius
Sure, accept the fact that a religion that is also the government itself is going to handle weapons that can destroy the world itself.
Why not? They are all so sane...
Video of meeting in chambers in the holy city of Qom
16
posted on
02/20/2006 4:42:40 AM PST
by
bill1952
("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
To: Flavius
Right--guarantees from confirmed-lying, murderous, state terrorists. That'll be worth something--NOT!!
So, they're looking for a little "success in peacemaking," eh? As in "hudna"?
These vermin need to depart the earth.
HF
17
posted on
02/20/2006 4:43:24 AM PST
by
holden
(holden on'a'na truth, de whole truth, 'n nuttin' but de truth)
To: hershey
“For a mistrustful West, the quid pro quo would be to give U.N. inspectors more intrusive powers via a Security Council resolution to prevent suspected atomic bomb projects.”Translation;
“They are 'gonna cut your throat... but you can demand to watch them sharpen the knife.”
18
posted on
02/20/2006 4:46:11 AM PST
by
johnny7
(“Iuventus stultorum magister”)
To: Flavius
I'm glad he knows what We'll Accept! I don't believe he has any idea what's really going on in Iran.
To: wolfcreek
"I'm glad he knows what We'll Accept! I don't believe he has any idea what's really going on in Iran."
>>>>>>>>..............................
I am more worried about hunting accidents..much more important than IRAN or Able Danger or the Barrett report. If any of the above got the same press - things would move very quickly.
20
posted on
02/20/2006 4:53:35 AM PST
by
ConsentofGoverned
(if a sucker is born every minute, what are the voters?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
