TV Schedule

Anti-Iran rhetoric raises UN concerns


  3. Vierotchka
  4. related topics
The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said Sunday he had no evidence Iran was working actively to build nuclear weapons and expressed concern that escalating rhetoric from the U.S. could bring disaster.

"We have information that there has been maybe some studies about possible weaponization," said Mohamed ElBaradei, who leads the International Atomic Energy Agency. "That's why we have said that we cannot give Iran a pass right now, because there is still a lot of question marks."

"But have we seen Iran having the nuclear material that can readily be used into a weapon? No. Have we seen an active weaponization program? No." Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Iran this month of "lying" about the aim of its nuclear program. She said there is no doubt Tehran wants the capability to produce nuclear weapons and has deceived the IAEA about its intentions.

Vice President Dick Cheney has raised the prospect of "serious consequences" if Iran were found to be working toward developing a nuclear weapon. Last week, the Bush administration announced harsh penalties against the Iranian military and state-owned banking systems in hopes of raising pressure on the world financial system to cut ties with Tehran.
....

Déjà vù all over again...
Vierotchka

6 responses // Anti-Iran rhetoric raises UN concerns

  • God Help us...
    arielvargasruiz
  • Well, we're boned.

    How did that saying go? Fool me once..shame...shame on you...fool me twice...can't get fooled again. Or, in non-Bushim speak: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
    ACandyDarkly
  • As has been pointed out elsewhere, is an attack against Iran really a "back door" attack against Russia, as Russia has let the US know very clearly that it will consider an attack on Iran an attack against Russia?
    Vierotchka
  • think about this, afghanistan, pakistan, turkey and iraq already w huge US military bases. russia cannot trust china, they are more on the US side than on the russian side.

    just in case
    http://projectvisa.com/images/maps/Middle%20East.gif
    lfm
    • lfm
    • 8 months ago
  • Actually, Ifm, Russia and China are working together now, they share a common interest in the USA's not attacking Iran, both have supplied Iran with sophisticated weaponry, and they already signed a treaty in 2001:

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/jul2001/chin-j23.shtm...

    They have also both recently entered into Security Alliances:

    http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/10/52B7E84D-8...
    Vierotchka
  • information :-D

    thank you V

    cool, so china not included, all the other big bases are still there. regardless, what do u think about china in particular. is it ever on anyone's side? they seem to jump from here to there, why not, its good for business.
    lfm
    • lfm
    • 8 months ago

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response.