PDA

View Full Version : Iran leader says nuclear issue closed


radioguy
09-25-2007, 07:50 PM
Iran leader says nuclear issue closed
By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer
25 minutes ago



UNITED NATIONS - Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared Tuesday that Iran's disputed nuclear program is closed as a political issue and said Tehran will ignore a U.N. Security Council demand imposed by "arrogant powers" that it halt uranium enrichment.

He told world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly that Iran has decided to pursue the monitoring of its nuclear program "through its appropriate legal path," the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency.

When Ahmadinejad was ushered to the podium of the General Assembly to speak, the U.S. delegation walked out, leaving only a low-ranking note-taker to listen to his speech, which indirectly accused the United States and Israel of major human rights violations.

The Iranian president spoke hours after French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned the assembly that allowing Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons would be an "unacceptable risk to stability in the region and in the world."

Earlier, German Chancellor Angela Merkel threatened tougher sanctions against Iran if the country remained intractable on the dispute over its nuclear program.

Iran insists the program is purely peaceful, aimed solely at using nuclear reactors to generate electricity. But the United States and key European nations believe the program is a cover for an Iranian attempt to produce nuclear weapons.

Ahmadinejad has defied two Security Council resolutions demanding Iran suspend enrichment and imposing escalating sanctions on key figures and organizations involved in the nuclear program. He made clear in his speech that Iran did not intend to comply with them now.

"In the last two years, abusing the Security Council, the arrogant powers have repeatedly accused Iran and even made military threats and imposed illegal sanctions against it," he said.

"Fortunately, the IAEA has recently tried to regain its legal role as support of the rights of its members while supervising nuclear activities," he added. "We see this as a correct approach adopted by the agency."

As a result, Ahmadinejad said, "I officially announce that in our opinion the nuclear issue of Iran is now closed and has turned into an ordinary agency matter."

Earlier this month, IAEA chief Mohamed El-Baradei said Iran's cooperation with the agency represented an important step, but he urged Tehran to answer all questions — including reported experiments that link enrichment and missile technology — before the end of the year.

This week, IAEA technical officials returned to Tehran to deal with the nuclear questions. But while Iran is allowing the IAEA to inspect its known nuclear facilities, it no longer allows inspectors freedom to look elsewhere for suspicious activities on short notice as it once did.

El-Baradei recently proposed a compromise under which Iran would agree to answer questions on past nuclear activities, some of them with possible weapons applications, that it had refused to answer in the past. Tehran pledged to respond by the end of the year.

The U.S. initially opposed the plan, fearing it could draw attention away from Iran's defiance of the Security Council demand for a halt to Iranian uranium enrichment. It later endorsed the plan while emphasizing that must obey the council.

Speaking to reporters after his speech, Ahmadinejad sought to clarify Tehran's stance on the nuclear standoff, which he blamed on "certain big powers" that have sought "to turn a simple legal issue into a very loud, controversial political issue."

He said Tehran's stance is that the matter involves only legal issues for the IAEA to handle, alluding to the Iranian regime's insistence that it is following its commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to use nuclear power only for peaceful purposes.

In his speech to the assembly, Sarkozy called for the international community to be firm in pressuring Iran.

"There will not be peace in the world if the international community falters in the face of the proliferation of nuclear arms," Sarkozy said. The Iranian crisis "will only be resolved if firmness and dialogue go hand-in-hand."

Sarkozy's comments came after Germany's leader threatened tougher sanctions against Iran if the country remains intractable. Merkel said an Iranian nuclear bomb would have devastating consequences not only for Israel and the whole of the Middle East, but for Europe and the rest of the world.

"For this reason, the international community must not let itself become splintered" in dealing with Iran, Merkel told reporters in New York. "The world should not have to prove to Iran that it is building a bomb, but Iran must convince the world that it doesn't want to build a nuclear bomb."

Iran was not without allies. Nicaragua's leftist President Daniel Ortega angrily chastised the U.S. for seeking to stop other countries from enriching uranium, which is allowed under the Nonproliferation Treaty.

Ortega said the United States, as "the only country in the world to have dropped nuclear bombs on innocent people," had no right to question the right of Iran and North Korea to pursue nuclear technology for "peaceful purposes."

"And even if they want nuclear power for purposes that are not peaceful, with what right does (the U.S.) question it?" he told the world leaders.

Ortega has promised to maintain ties with Washington since taking office again in January, but also has signed a series of accords with Iran.

Earlier in the assembly's opening session, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon pledged to push for lasting peace in the Middle East and an end to the conflict in Sudan's Darfur region in the coming year, calling it one of the most challenging in the U.N.'s history.

"Looking to the coming year and beyond, we can foresee a daunting array of challenges to come," he said. "They are problems that respect no borders — that no country, big or small, rich or poor, can resolve on its own."

Ban said peace in the Middle East is vital to the stability of the region and the world.

"We know what is required: an end to violence, an end to occupation, the creation of a Palestinian state at peace with itself and Israel, and a comprehensive regional peace between Israel and the Arab world," he said.

Ban said the elements for a renewed push for peace were being brought together by Arab leaders and international negotiators. The U.S. is hosting a high-level summit this fall focusing on a comprehensive peace agreement.

Ban cautioned, however, that the global community must address the worsening security situation in Iraq, calling it "the whole world's problem." He said the U.N. has an important role to play in promoting political negotiations and national reconciliation in the country.

He also said the U.N. would "leave no stone unturned to end the tragedy in Darfur" and urged the Sudanese government to live up to its pledge to implement a cease-fire and join peace talks on ending the conflict in the war-ravaged region.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070925/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_general_assembly;_ylt=A0WTUf3Hi_lGwTMBUwis0NUE

Bill
09-25-2007, 07:58 PM
What did you expect?

You just harrassed and threatened him, did you really think he was going to roll over and lick your feet?

If I was him, I'd be giving the orders to double nuclear production, and double the fortification and concealment.

So maybe you should be writing Bush and begging him to protect you?

Linkster
09-25-2007, 08:05 PM
I sure wish people would stop associating "enrichment of uranium" with bomb-making - I think some of our media need to go back to school - every country in the world that has nuclear power plants - enriches uranium - you have to have it for the electrical production - pretty simple to me. Now if they were setting up a breeder reactor Id start looking at the possibility they might be looking forward to making a bomb

Smurf-Herder
09-25-2007, 08:07 PM
This is the funniest part:

"Earlier this month, IAEA chief Mohamed El-Baradei said Iran's cooperation with the agency represented an important step, but he urged Tehran to answer all questions — including reported experiments that link enrichment and missile technology — before the end of the year.

This week, IAEA technical officials returned to Tehran to deal with the nuclear questions. But while Iran is allowing the IAEA to inspect its known nuclear facilities, it no longer allows inspectors freedom to look elsewhere for suspicious activities on short notice as it once did.

El-Baradei recently proposed a compromise under which Iran would agree to answer questions on past nuclear activities, some of them with possible weapons applications, that it had refused to answer in the past. Tehran pledged to respond by the end of the year."

So after four years of trying to get answers on the program they kept secret for 18 years before that, they say they'll answer the questions on the documents given to them by AQ Kahn (via North Korea) on how to form nuclear material into a sphere and warhead design plans, hidden underground facilities and evidence they have P-2 centrifuges which enrich twice as much uranium at four times the speed, by the end of the year.

I wonder if they'll have a full arsenal by then.

What we can see is not the problem. What they're hiding and refuse to explain is. I think everything the IAEA was allowed to see was just for show. One particular facility Iran refuses to llet the IAEA see is under a military base. BTW, the Revolutionary Guard (you know, the guys arming Hezbollah and Iraqi Shiite Militias) are in charge of Iran's entire nuclear program.

I've been following this for quite a while.

Linkster
09-25-2007, 08:08 PM
I thought Blackwater was the one arming the Shites - and the US is arming the Sunnis - Im getting confused :p

Smurf-Herder
09-25-2007, 08:10 PM
I sure wish people would stop associating "enrichment of uranium" with bomb-making - I think some of our media need to go back to school - every country in the world that has nuclear power plants - enriches uranium - you have to have it for the electrical production - pretty simple to me. Now if they were setting up a breeder reactor Id start looking at the possibility they might be looking forward to making a bomb

?

Hey, they've got over 200 tons of yellowcake already enriched and plan on building three buildings to house 50,000 centrifuges. You don't need a breeder reactor. Once they have everything in place (if they don't already at a hidden facility), they could make two dozen nukes a year.

Bill
09-25-2007, 08:14 PM
?

Hey, they've got over 200 tons of yellowcake already enriched and plan on building three buildings to house 50,000 centrifuges. You don't need a breeder reactor. Once they have everything in place (if they don't already at a hidden facility), they could make two dozen nukes a year.

Better get to killin' then.

Just freekin do it. Pull the trigger.

Smurf-Herder
09-25-2007, 08:26 PM
Better get to killin' then.

Just freekin do it. Pull the trigger.

Stimpy, you idiot! We just want to take out their capacity to kill millions.

TheCenturion
09-25-2007, 08:39 PM
?

Hey, they've got over 200 tons of yellowcake already enriched and plan on building three buildings to house 50,000 centrifuges. You don't need a breeder reactor. Once they have everything in place (if they don't already at a hidden facility), they could make two dozen nukes a year.

Yellowcake, per se, is not a specific component for a nuclear bomb and neither is enriched uranium. It's necessary to produce weapons grade, or rather, Highly Enriched Uranium in order to create a fission reaction efficient enough to produce and effective nuclear weapon.

Not only is it highly unlikely that Iran has the capacity to produce these products but, as long as they comply with the IAEA Inspections regimen, (and there is no evidence they are not) it is virtually impossible that they would be able to create a usable weapon - much less have the resources to deploy it against us or anybody else.

Furthermore, they are legally entitled by international treaties, to which we are a signatory, to the development of nuclear energy.

This is in contrast to our so called ally, Israel, which maintains a furtive nuclear arsenal which goes completely without any international supervision whatsoever. Yet, they regularly invade neighboring sovereign countries, issue routine threats against Iran, maintain a colonialist military occupation based on the rankest forms of racist supremacist repression and all with complete impunity as the Bush Regime turns a totally blind eye to it.

Do you not see some double standard here? Or has Right-Wing Zionist Kool-Aid destroyed even your most rudimentary and fundamental capacity to empathize with others and exercise any plain common sense whatsoever?

This is simply yet more baseless propaganda, fear mongering and demonizing of others courtesy of The Bush Crime Gang. We've all been here before.

Fool me once.

Smurf-Herder
09-25-2007, 08:55 PM
Yellowcake, per se, is not a specific component for a nuclear bomb and neither is enriched uranium. It's necessary to produce weapons grade, or rather, Highly Enriched Uranium in order to create a fission reaction efficient enough to produce and effective nuclear weapon.

Not only is it highly unlikely that Iran has the capacity to produce these products but, as long as they comply with the IAEA Inspections regimen, (and there is no evidence they are not) it is virtually impossible that they would be able to create a usable weapon - much less have the resources to deploy it against us or anybody else.



All they have to do is run the enriched uranium through again to further refine it to weapons grade. And they're not complying with the IAEA. that's the problem in the first place. The IAEA took the case to the UNSC when Iran refused to cooperate, remember?

And they have nuclear warhead plans and a 15 page document for forming nuclear weapons cores, that the IAEA saw. They've already modified Shahab-3D missile nosecones to the tri-conal nuclear re-entry design.

TheCenturion
09-25-2007, 09:01 PM
All they have to do is run the enriched uranium through again to further refine it to weapons grade. And they're not complying with the IAEA. that's the problem in the first place. The IAEA took the case to the UNSC when Iran refused to cooperate, remember?

And they have nuclear warhead plans and a 15 page document for forming nuclear weapons cores, that the IAEA saw. They've already modified Shahab-3D missile nosecones to the tri-conal nuclear re-entry design.

You're dreaming. Making Highly Enriched Uranium is nothing like running your laundry through another cycle because there's still some shit stains in your underwear. Somebody is pulling your leg. Please provide an authoritative citation from whatever your sources are that back up your assertions professor.

Smurf-Herder
09-25-2007, 09:12 PM
You're dreaming. Making Highly Enriched Uranium is nothing like running your laundry through another cycle because there's still some shit stains in your underwear. Somebody is pulling your leg. Please provide an authoritative citation from whatever your sources are that back up your assertions professor.

Every expert I've seen in the past four years has described how you get weapons grade material. You just refine it more.

As to the other stuff, how about the IAEA?

Iran Said to Have Nuclear Warhead Plans
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8FG37780&show_article=1

"The four-page report also criticized Iran for refusing to provide interviews with at least one nuclear scientist linked to the military and dismissing requests for information on "tests related to high explosives and the design of a missile re-entry vehicle, all of which could have a military nuclear dimension."

"First mention of the documents linked to constructing a nuclear warhead was made late last year in a longer IAEA report. At that time, the agency said only that they showed how to cast "enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms."

In the brief report obtained Tuesday, however, the agency said bluntly that the 15 pages of text and drawings showing how to cast fissile uranium into metal were "related to the fabrication of nuclear weapon components."

Asked about the finding, a senior diplomat close to the IAEA declined to elaborate but emphasized that the documents had no other use."

Then there's this (the re-entry vehicle the IAEA was talking about):

Nuke-Modified Nosecones and Secret Facilities Hang Over Iran
http://inbrief.threatswatch.org/2006/04/nukemodified-nosecones-and-sec/

"Missile experts analyzing footage of recent Shahab-3 test launches have concluded that Iran has modified the nosecone to accommodate a nuclear warhead. The Telegraph report cites experts noting the triconical design of the new nosecone “to accommodate a nuclear device and this type of warhead is normally found only in nuclear weapons.” An unnamed senior US official said that it was a significant development and that Iran has “been trying to do this for years and now they have succeeded. It is a very disturbing development.”

Bill
09-25-2007, 09:18 PM
Stimpy, you idiot! We just want to take out their capacity to kill millions.

talkytalk is for women.

Smurf-Herder
09-25-2007, 11:12 PM
talkytalk is for women.

Okay, then .......

Jane, you ignorant slut! We just want to take out their capacity to kill millions.

disrupter
09-25-2007, 11:23 PM
So the guy who is nearly powerless in the Iranian government has spoken.

Wow you are so sharp about who we should be talking & listening too.

When you are interested in purchasing one of Trump's towers do you negotiate through the doorman?

That would be consistent & expected.

NeoPsychos . . . . clueless

edit:
Maybe the reason Ahmadinejad is so angry is he is so powerless at home.
the only real power he has is a non-overridable veto.

Calling him a 'dictator' just exposes the speaker's absolute, extreme IGNORANCE.

Smurf-Herder
09-25-2007, 11:58 PM
So the guy who is nearly powerless in the Iranian government has spoken.

Wow you are so sharp about who we should be talking & listening too.

When you are interested in purchasing one of Trump's towers do you negotiate through the doorman?

That would be consistent & expected.

NeoPsychos . . . . clueless

edit:
Maybe the reason Ahmadinejad is so angry is he is so powerless at home.
the only real power he has is a non-overridable veto.

Calling him a 'dictator' just exposes the speaker's absolute, extreme IGNORANCE.

Did I say the word "dictator"?


He's the guy the mullahs stuck in the position to represent Iran to the world. He's their spokesman and fallguy. But that doesn't mean they don't agree with what he's saying. Think of him as the Minister of Propaganda.

disrupter
09-26-2007, 12:09 AM
did i specify that it was you that used the term 'dictator'?
no
there was some questioner at Columbia who called him that, & that has been picked up by the sensationalist corporate media.

He is the guy who was pre-approved to run for office,
& presumably [actually?] elected to office by voters.

Minister of Propaganda might be correct,
but it could be these mullahs are so covert & introspective they merely let him run his mouth.
Fallguy is probably one of the things they don't mind using him as. Like a built-in, disposable trial balloon floater.

Maybe they want to have the US attack Iran.
They have very small support in the population & a crappy economy.
If they get attacked the population will reflexively unify behind the government [mullahs] just as the US did behind Bush after 911.

Smurf-Herder
09-26-2007, 12:29 AM
did i specify that it was you that used the term 'dictator'?
no
there was some questioner at Columbia who called him that, & that has been picked up by the sensationalist corporate media.

He is the guy who was pre-approved to run for office,
& presumably [actually?] elected to office by voters.

Minister of Propaganda might be correct,
but it could be these mullahs are so covert & introspective they merely let him run his mouth.
Fallguy is probably one of the things they don't mind using him as. Like a built-in, disposable trial balloon floater.

Maybe they want to have the US attack Iran.
They have very small support in the population & a crappy economy.
If they get attacked the population will reflexively unify behind the government [mullahs] just as the US did behind Bush after 911.

Of course they want us to attack them.

But the thing is, eventually they will find a reason to attack first, if we don't; once they have everything they need in place.

disrupter
09-26-2007, 12:39 AM
take out his capcity to kill millions, by ourselves killing millions?

We have caused a million additional deaths in Iraq, so we can put that check mark on our 'score' card. Boy, don't we feel good about ourselves, eh?

Certitude & Correctness are independent of one another.

Your certitude is 100%,
the score on your correctness is MINUS 400%+ [WMDs, 911-Iraq, Democracy, Surge=political progress] oops forgot [war cost = 50 billion, greeted with open arms & celebration, be there a few months]

I am sure i have forgotten the complete list of your errors in logic,

but like i say your CERTITUDE has been 100% and 100% and 100% and 100% and 100% and 100% and . . . . .

Smurf-Herder
09-26-2007, 12:49 AM
take out his capcity to kill millions, by ourselves killing millions?

We have caused a million additional deaths in Iraq, so we can put that check mark on our 'score' card. Boy, don't we feel good about ourselves, eh?

Certitude & Correctness are independent of one another.

Your certitude is 100%,
the score on your correctness is MINUS 400%+ [WMDs, 911-Iraq, Democracy, Surge=political progress] oops forgot [war cost = 50 billion, greeted with open arms & celebration, be there a few months]

I am sure i have forgotten the complete list of your errors in logic,

but like i say your CERTITUDE has been 100% and 100% and 100% and 100% and 100% and 100% and . . . . .

Okay, we'll let him kill millions first. Does that make you happy?

disrupter
09-26-2007, 01:05 AM
I think Iran's leadership, while it is a theocratic police state, still strikes me as more rational than North Korea's insecure short man & the volatile Pakistan which has gone close to a nuclear brink with India a couple of short years ago.

AND Iran doesn't already have a nuke.

Have you even TRIED diplomacy?

God knows that has been rejected for Iraq, with DISASTROUS results.

We have already let a million die.
Why don't we let some cooler more rational heads run things instead of you NeoPsychos, just for a little breather from all the mass murder, eh?

But you are reflexive psychos who are addicted to having some external enemy to focus on. You simply lack the internal cerebral balance to run your lives from inside your own heads. If you don't have some enemy your addiction forces you are compelled to create one.

Real people, scientists know we have more real yet more obscure enemies than other people. Global warming, rogue asteroids, bioinfection disasters, technological hurdles.

Maybe stupid, compulsive people serve some kind of obscure purpose i don't yet comprehend, but if you threaten my existence or humanities or the biosphere's continued existence i have no problem putting a gun to your head & splattering your damaged brains out. love & kisses, babers.

maybe we can read the splatter like tea leaves?
better use latex gloves, it could be contagious.

Smurf-Herder
09-26-2007, 05:36 PM
I think Iran's leadership, while it is a theocratic police state, still strikes me as more rational than North Korea's insecure short man & the volatile Pakistan which has gone close to a nuclear brink with India a couple of short years ago.

AND Iran doesn't already have a nuke.

Have you even TRIED diplomacy?

God knows that has been rejected for Iraq, with DISASTROUS results.

We have already let a million die.
Why don't we let some cooler more rational heads run things instead of you NeoPsychos, just for a little breather from all the mass murder, eh?

But you are reflexive psychos who are addicted to having some external enemy to focus on. You simply lack the internal cerebral balance to run your lives from inside your own heads. If you don't have some enemy your addiction forces you are compelled to create one.

Real people, scientists know we have more real yet more obscure enemies than other people. Global warming, rogue asteroids, bioinfection disasters, technological hurdles.

Maybe stupid, compulsive people serve some kind of obscure purpose i don't yet comprehend, but if you threaten my existence or humanities or the biosphere's continued existence i have no problem putting a gun to your head & splattering your damaged brains out. love & kisses, babers.

maybe we can read the splatter like tea leaves?
better use latex gloves, it could be contagious.

Have we tried diplomacy with Iran?

Are you behind the curve or what?

We offered them everthing possible; and it's a year later and they're still jerking our chain.

P5+1 nuclear package of incentives offered to Iran (2006)
http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=5294

Bill
09-27-2007, 12:25 AM
We offered them everthing possible; and it's a year later and they're still jerking our chain.


Just bomb the crap out of them.

that'll make 'em submit!