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

Skip to comments.

ElBaradei warns against striking Iran
AP via JPost ^ | 9/17/7

Posted on 09/17/2007 10:40:09 AM PDT by SmithL

Invoking the war in Iraq, the chief UN nuclear inspector criticized talk of attacking Iran as "hype" Monday, saying such options should only be considered as a last resort and only if authorized by the UN Security Council.

"I would not talk about any use of force," said Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in an indirect response to French warnings that the world had to be prepared for the possibility of war in the event that Iran obtains atomic weapons.

Saying only the UN Security Council could authorize the use of force, ElBaradei urged the world to remember Iraq before considering any similar action against Teheran.

"There are rules on how to use force, and I would hope that everybody would have gotten the lesson after the Iraq situation, where 700,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives on the suspicion that a country has nuclear weapons," he told reporters.

He was alluding to a key US argument for invading Iraq in 2003 without Security Council approval - that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms. Four years later, no such arsenals have been found.

ElBaradei, speaking outside a 144-nation meeting of his agency, urged both sides to back away from confrontation, in comments addressed both to Iran and the US-led group of nations pressing for new UN sanctions on Teheran for its refusal to end uranium enrichment.

"We need to be cool," he told reporters, adding: "We need not to hype the issue".

On Sunday, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner warned that the world should prepare for war if Iran obtains nuclear weapons and said European leaders were considering their own economic sanctions against the Islamic country.

Negotiations and two sets of UN Security Council sanctions have failed to persuade Iran to stop its uranium enrichment program, a process that can produce fuel for nuclear power plants as well as material used in atomic weapons.

Iran insists its atomic activities are aimed only at producing energy, but the US, its European allies and other world powers suspect Iranian authorities of seeking nuclear weapons.

Kouchner, speaking on RTL radio, said that if "such a bomb is made... We must prepare ourselves for the worst," he said, specifying that could mean a war.

The United States also has refused to rule out the possibility of force against Iran if it continues to defy Security Council demands on enrichment. Still, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday the US administration is committed, for now, to using diplomatic and economic means to counter the potential nuclear threat from Iran.

"I think that the administration believes at this point that continuing to try and deal with the Iranian threat, the Iranian challenge, through diplomatic and economic means is by far the preferable approach. That's the one we are using," the Pentagon chief said.

Iran does not directly figure on the agenda of the IAEA general conference, which opened a five-day meeting Monday. But comments, both inside and outside the plenary hall, reflected the world's concerns over Teheran's nuclear aims.

In comments alluding to the US and its Western allies, Iranian Vice President Reza Aghazadeh accused unnamed countries of forcing the international community onto the "unjustified, illegal, deceptive and misleading path ... by imposing restrictions and sanctions."

And he again ruled out scrapping Iran's uranium enrichment program, telling delegates Iran would "never give up its inalienable and legal right in benefiting from peaceful nuclear technology."

ElBaradei, architect of a recent pact with Teheran committing it to stop stonewalling his experts and lift the shroud of secrecy on past suspicious nuclear work, defended the agreement against criticism it could be used by Teheran as a smoke screen to draw attention from its defiance of the Security Council.

"What we need to do is encourage Iran to work with the agency to clarify the outstanding issues," he said.

"I do not believe at this stage that we are facing a clear and present danger that requires we go beyond diplomacy," ElBaradei said, said, adding that his agency had no information that "the Iran program is being weaponized."

"We are not using a stick, we are not using a carrot, but we are trying to be impartial and objective," he said, alluding to Western criticism that he was being too soft on Iran. If "in time of hype telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act ... I will continue to be a revolutionary."


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Israel; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: airstrikes; elbaradei; iaea; iran; iraniannukes; nukes; terrorsupporter; un
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

1 posted on 09/17/2007 10:40:12 AM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL
I would not talk about any use of force," said Mohamed>

Considering the name, that I all I need to know.

2 posted on 09/17/2007 10:43:14 AM PDT by TexasRepublic (Afghan protest - "Death to Dog Washers!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

3 posted on 09/17/2007 10:44:07 AM PDT by TornadoAlley3 ( An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Okay, so there is no "clear and present danger", so there is no need or justification for using force. Let's focus on diplomacy.

What's that? Iran has successfully tested a nuclear weapon? Well, that changes everything!! Obviously, talk of military action would be extremely foolish in light of these events. Let's focus on dipomacy.

The UN simply enables the worst tyrants in the world.

4 posted on 09/17/2007 10:44:51 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The broken wall, the burning roof and tower. And Agamemnon dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasRepublic
Up, just another muzzie covering up for fellow muzzies...I say BOMB THE CRAP OUT OF THEM! Preferably when this idiot is “inspecting”.
5 posted on 09/17/2007 10:45:28 AM PDT by rightwingextremist1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

6 posted on 09/17/2007 10:47:00 AM PDT by RightWhale (Snow above 2000')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
"I would not talk about any use of force [against iran]," said Mohamed ElBaradei, ...

First, this is a muslim advising against the use of force against muslims.

Second, if your neighbor says he is acquiring a weapon with which to do you harm, prudence dictates you not let that happen.

iran is the only national entity that can prevent the "use of force" against iran.

7 posted on 09/17/2007 10:47:39 AM PDT by RobinOfKingston (Man, that's stupid...even by congressional standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingextremist1776

Is he the Mooselimb cousin of Hans Blix. Blix. Blix. It just needed to be typed 3 times.


8 posted on 09/17/2007 10:48:03 AM PDT by shankbear (Al-Qaeda grew while Monica blew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Quote: “Saying only the UN Security Council could authorize the use of force, ElBaradei urged the world to remember Iraq . . .”

Oh, you mean where the UN did not authorize force and we did anyway, sure we can remember that. I suppose that to the leftists, Iraq signals somehow that the UN and UN alone can authorize the use of force. I think they are in for a great deal of dissapointment.


9 posted on 09/17/2007 10:49:25 AM PDT by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

“Saying only the UN Security Council could authorize the use of force”

Sure thing, Mo.


10 posted on 09/17/2007 10:49:41 AM PDT by cweese (Hook 'em Horns!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
"I would not talk about any use of force," said Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in an indirect response to French warnings that the world had to be prepared for the possibility of war in the event that Iran obtains atomic weapons.

Saying only the UN Security Council could authorize the use of force, ElBaradei urged the world to remember Iraq before considering any similar action against Teheran.

Sit your punk ass down you idiot stick. It was someone in your postion years ago that said they were sure Hussein had WMDs, since he was not allowing inspectors full acesss. That person evaporated into the woodwork, as soon as people said Bush was lying.

What we do is none of your f'n business. As for Iran, we don't need to send in ground troops. We'll take out the political and military leadership as well as the nuke sites and terrorist training camps. Then we'll see who steps into the power vacuum and repeat if necessary.

You folks can't even get the nuclear issue settled, but think you've got the juevos to make an overall assessment. Bull s--t!

Go take a valium and let some men take over you wuse.

11 posted on 09/17/2007 10:51:04 AM PDT by DoughtyOne ((Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking its heritage.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
The chief UN nuclear inspector, Mohamed ElBaradei, criticized talk of attacking Iran as "hype" Monday, saying such options should only be considered as a last resort and only if authorized by the UN Security Council.

On the other hand, my plumber, Ray Stonebraker, thinks we should have taken out Iran at least two years ago.

12 posted on 09/17/2007 10:51:17 AM PDT by Prince Caspian (Don't ask if it's risky... Ask if the reward is worth the risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
"...I would hope that everybody would have gotten the lesson after the Iraq situation, where 700,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives..."

700,000 now. My my my. That number grows like his bank account every time he opens his mouth.

13 posted on 09/17/2007 10:52:15 AM PDT by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

“...I would hope that everybody would have gotten the lesson after the Iraq situation, where 700,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives...”

so what. More babies than that are aborted each year!!!


14 posted on 09/17/2007 10:59:03 AM PDT by ulm1 (“There are scandals that need to be addressed. Republicans address them, Democrats re-elect them.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

That dude looks like an Arab Dr Phil....


15 posted on 09/17/2007 11:04:53 AM PDT by MD_Willington_1976
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
So, show us the mass graves of these 700K, Mr El Baradei. You just blew the rest of your credibility with that moonbat lie.
16 posted on 09/17/2007 11:05:18 AM PDT by Blue State Insurgent (FRee Iran)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

” Saying only the UN Security Council could authorize the use of force, “

he still doesn’t GET IT, does he


17 posted on 09/17/2007 11:26:17 AM PDT by sure_fine ( • not one to over kill the thought process)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Memo to El Baradei and the U-bloody-effing-N: Kindly go sit on an air hose, turn in on and rotate!


18 posted on 09/17/2007 11:27:45 AM PDT by Convert from ECUSA (Hunter and Tancredo in '08! La Raza - the PLO of the Western Hemisphere)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Saddam Hussein, the President of Iraq, has warned the US about going to war with his country.
American President George W Bush has been talking for a while about attacking the Middle Eastern country of Iraq.

Saddam is thought to be one of the biggest enemies of the US. But in a speech on Iraqi TV, Saddam warned any attack on Iraq by the US would fail.

He said the only way to get peace is talk their differences through.

Weapons

Tension between the two countries started over 10 years ago, when Iraq invaded the State of Kuwait. The invasion started the Gulf War which Britain was involved in.

And after the 11 September attacks, the US said they would think about going to war with countries involved in terrorism. The US believe that includes Iraq.

They think Saddam is making dangerous chemical weapons and they don’t trust him not to use them.

In the past, Saddam made it really difficult for United Nations (UN) weapons inspectors to search Iraq. In the end they decided to leave.

But the British MP who deals with the Middle East said war could be avoided if Saddam decided to let weapons inspectors into his country.


19 posted on 09/17/2007 12:19:11 PM PDT by Candor7 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Baghdad_(1258))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Rule out nothing. This twerp is a fox in the henhouse.


20 posted on 09/17/2007 12:32:11 PM PDT by Inwoodian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 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