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

Skip to comments.

Bush on warpath over UN's shock report on Iran A-bomb (Dubya is Angry!)
The Daily Telegraph ^ | 09/07/2003 | Con Coughlin

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.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: iaea; iran; nuclearweapons; nukes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-190 next last
To: biffalobull; Lord_Baltar
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?
Because we said so. Which is a LOT safer than THEM saying they WILL.
121 posted on 09/06/2003 8:03:57 PM PDT by Libertina (I agree with the Republicans' view on gun rights...but wish they'd stop aiming them at their feet ;))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen
BTW, #120 is a JOKE. (c8
122 posted on 09/06/2003 8:04:20 PM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
[Snicker.] I doubt Lord Baltar would go that far! There is little functional difference between Al-Qaeda and the Iranian government, from what I can see. One has the international "legitimacy" of being a "sovereign state" and one does not. But they are both thugs and both bent on destruction of the West.
123 posted on 09/06/2003 8:06:51 PM PDT by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
so I'll stand in for him...

Are you prepared to be assaulted in diverse ways?

124 posted on 09/06/2003 8:13:56 PM PDT by Radix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: WackyKat
So Bush and his Neo-Con handlers have been caught lying about Iraq having WMDS, and now they expect the American people to believe them and support an invasion of Iran. No thanks, find some other suckers.

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.

125 posted on 09/06/2003 8:23:41 PM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all things that need to be done need to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
We are not going to be able to keep this technology from speading to these rogue states. There is too much money involved, too many sources, too many people who have an agenda against us, too many nations and groups that understand that getting a Bomb makes any action against them way too costly to try. We need to secure our borders and ports of entry and get an operational missle defence in place. The rest of the world is going to have to look out for itself. God help Israel if the Iranians get nuclear weapons. These maniacs are willing to a few million casualties if it means they can exterminate the Israeli's.
126 posted on 09/06/2003 8:24:54 PM PDT by Kozak (" No mans life liberty or property is safe when the legislature is in session." Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibKill
I do my best.

:)
127 posted on 09/06/2003 8:32:56 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Brian S
made this argument too many times to recall. and you are totally correct. however, maybe this opportunity will allow for damage control on the cred. dont expect israel to always have to save the world from itself. knocking out the major facilities would be a no stress operation for the b-2. GWB having the resolve to just do this w/o getting bogged down in another state dept/powell arabist mudpie in the UN (useless nations) with the euro-trash hankering for iranian rights to energy producing nuclear power is in doubt.
128 posted on 09/06/2003 8:35:05 PM PDT by APRPEH (to empire and beyond)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Lord_Baltar
"And this sort of Left Wing Name Calling tactic does what for the level of discussion?"

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?

129 posted on 09/06/2003 8:37:53 PM PDT by atomic conspiracy ( Anti-war movement: road-kill on the highway to freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
Yes, but if we go to war with the UN we have to take out all of Europe. Who would take care of the clean up??? Oh, lets give Europe to the Soviet Union.... damn, Russia.... are there any facist regimes like Napolean who would take this stinky scum suckers???
130 posted on 09/06/2003 8:42:03 PM PDT by Porterville (I spell stuff wrong sometimes, get over yourself, you're not that great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozak
We are not going to be able to keep this technology from speading to these rogue states...

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?

131 posted on 09/06/2003 8:42:10 PM PDT by Radix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy; Lord_Baltar
"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?"

We arent? could have fooled me? and if the US weren't, then who? and the world would be safer in your opinon my lord, if say, another country were to step into being #1. when in world history was there not a time when one or two or three countries didnt run everything? the world is safer with american policmen, period.. PARAPHRASING... Ronald Reagan (i cant imagine a world where america was not number 1)...
132 posted on 09/06/2003 8:44:29 PM PDT by APRPEH (to empire and beyond)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: jungleboy
and the world will thank America for cleaning up Russia over this too...........hide and watch. Putin is good
for us and Russian democracy,the ole ruskies are the
remnant bad guys
133 posted on 09/06/2003 8:44:42 PM PDT by cars for sale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Comment #134 Removed by Moderator

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Thnx
135 posted on 09/06/2003 8:45:00 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Lots of moderator action.
136 posted on 09/06/2003 8:51:55 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Lord_Baltar
Analogy:
It is ok for law abiding citizens to have guns, but not criminals.
137 posted on 09/06/2003 8:53:27 PM PDT by rmlew ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: marcelene
U.S. WON'T REPORT IRAN NUKES TO UN

if this only meant that the B-2s were warming up......
138 posted on 09/06/2003 8:55:13 PM PDT by APRPEH (the one that got away)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen
"One has the international "legitimacy" of being a "sovereign state" and one does not. But they are both thugs and both bent on destruction of the West"


You got it, Zack
139 posted on 09/06/2003 8:55:24 PM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
... or let the Israelis do it ...

Been on the drawing board for years.

140 posted on 09/06/2003 8:56:25 PM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-190 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