|
machioveli
|
 |
« on: October 22, 2007, 11:21:01 AM » |
|
With its failer in recent years to keep track of N.koreas nuke program along with not even knowing about Iraqs program before being bombed by Israel, does the IAEA need a new over haul. Events even point recently to ignoring or not knowing about the facilities in Syria. Now, with Iran they are back tracking, saying Iran will take 3-8 years to build a nuke. Is this their way of saying "Yes" Iran has a secret weapons program? Yet, he says he still needs more time to come to a conclusion. With his buying the Iranians time he himself is creating a stage for a military conflict. The longer they stall on saying that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, the closer they get to creating a nuke and certain countries will not let that happen. The point I am trying to make is that ElBaradei along with the IAEA needs to do thier job. Announcing now that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, which most countries already know, will push countries foward with creating more sanctions NOT WAR. But his failure to do his job is pushing countries to use the latter, as they could be using this vital time to stop the program with sanctions rather than Iran using it to get closer to its goal, an Atomic Bomb.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Major Zee Lee
Forum cat lover
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +64/-169
Posts: 566
Kooks not allowed in (Secret meeting is next door)
|
|
« Reply #1 on: October 23, 2007, 01:06:08 AM » |
|
Just a suggestion... IAEA's budget in 2000 was $200 million. Tdoay is $200 million. See anything wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Do not take life too seriously; nobody lives to tell.
|
|
|
|
machioveli
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 23, 2007, 10:50:57 AM » |
|
Just a suggestion... IAEA's budget in 2000 was $200 million. Tdoay is $200 million. See anything wrong?
Yes they are being overpaid for talking alot. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ali*
Newbie
Karma: +1/-4
Posts: 10
B7ebbak ya Lebnan!
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 24, 2007, 12:14:14 AM » |
|
well we all know its not about ethics and world peace that IAEA works but they know syria doesnt have anything so they dont wanna waste their time.... so theyll just stay focused on iran in case sum1 acted stupidly  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Major Zee Lee
Forum cat lover
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +64/-169
Posts: 566
Kooks not allowed in (Secret meeting is next door)
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 24, 2007, 01:54:29 AM » |
|
Just a suggestion... IAEA's budget in 2000 was $200 million. Tdoay is $200 million. See anything wrong?
Yes they are being overpaid for talking alot. I guess IAEA's inspectors and all the people being inspected by IAEA would be glad to know your awareness on what IAEA does...  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Do not take life too seriously; nobody lives to tell.
|
|
|
|
Peisithanatos
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2007, 09:23:55 AM » |
|
they are being overpaid for talking alot. they are being paid for not asking bad questions about good countries (Israel of course). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
a big pile of bs covered with a thick layer of sugar
|
|
|
Ali*
Newbie
Karma: +1/-4
Posts: 10
B7ebbak ya Lebnan!
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2007, 10:13:35 AM » |
|
they are being overpaid for talking alot. they are being paid for not asking bad questions about good countries (Israel of course). you are being anti-semitic/anti-jewish in this post....  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fredledingue
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +30/-31
Posts: 868
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 29, 2007, 01:16:12 PM » |
|
I agree with Mach' that it's preferable that the IAEA states once for all that Iran do have a nuke program rather than seeking the ultimate proof.
The West won't wait for a proof before acting militarily. Because it will be too late. We had proof of NKorea nuke program only after their first test. We won't wait Iran's first test.
IF the UN stops playing with words and clearly expose the nuclear program, Iran will be almost forced to abandon and war will be averted.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Dr. Zoidberg is jewish (and an important AIPAC donator!)  |
|
|
|
Peisithanatos
|
|
« Reply #8 on: October 29, 2007, 07:25:10 PM » |
|
it's preferable that the IAEA states once for all that Iran do have a nuke program ends justify means? They said so mnay time they have absolutely NO reasons to believe (and questionale reasons to suspect) the program. You "prefer" they say something which they themselves do not believe. How about putting IAEA to Guantanamo to make them confess about the nuclear program? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
a big pile of bs covered with a thick layer of sugar
|
|
|
Fredledingue
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +30/-31
Posts: 868
|
|
« Reply #9 on: October 31, 2007, 03:02:24 PM » |
|
That's where you are wrong Peis:
The IAEA guys all believe Iran is trying to build a bomb. That's the only reason they are inspecting in Iran. The only reason the IAEA exists is to prevent nuclear arms proliferation.
The IAEA is not inspecting countries they believe have no could-be military nuclear program.
What they said is that they don't have material proof that such program is currently under way.
And that's very good news because, once such proof is established, there will be war almost immediately.
Don't forget that if there are 10 steps for building an atom bomb, the first 9 steps are purely civilian ones.
It's only when they will undertake the 10th step that a proof can materialy exist.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Dr. Zoidberg is jewish (and an important AIPAC donator!) |
|
|
Major Zee Lee
Forum cat lover
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +64/-169
Posts: 566
Kooks not allowed in (Secret meeting is next door)
|
|
« Reply #10 on: October 31, 2007, 03:14:33 PM » |
|
That's where you are wrong Peis:
The IAEA guys all believe Iran is trying to build a bomb. That's the only reason they are inspecting in Iran. The only reason the IAEA exists is to prevent nuclear arms proliferation.
The IAEA is not inspecting countries they believe have no could-be military nuclear program. Wrong, wrong, wrong. IAEA inspects ALL countries with nuclear technology. Which is perfectly rational. FAI, Spain does not have a military nuclear program, neither haves a domestic plutonium management program, but its nuclear reactors are watched by IAEA. Why? Because NOBODY wants that someone goes and steals plutonium from a Spanish reactor. So both Spain and the IAEA watch the fuel rods to make sure nobody steals plutonium, all the way since they're put to cool off in cooling pools to the moment they're transported to France for treatment. No neutral country in its mind would tolerate to be held as sole responsible for its plutonium if anything went wrong with it. So being watched by IAEA is standard procedure. Even the USA are watched by IAEA... in exchange for IAEA watch the same over all other members of nuclear club, of course. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Do not take life too seriously; nobody lives to tell.
|
|
|
|
Peisithanatos
|
|
« Reply #11 on: October 31, 2007, 09:41:37 PM » |
|
The IAEA guys all believe Iran is trying to build a bomb. they believe even though they say there is no evidence? So they're working for Iran, basically. Iran controls IAEA, UN, UNESCO and World Bank. The only reason the IAEA exists is to prevent nuclear arms proliferation.
IAEA is pushed by Americans, and u know that. The issue would not even be in the UN SC at all if not for American coercion on IAEA members. US official Stephen Rademaker involved in the issue admitted, for instance, that India's vote against Iran was forced by the US: "The best illustration of this is the two votes India cast against Iran at the IAEA," he said, adding: " I am the first person to admit that the votes were coerced." http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4851Americans have a habit of squeezing what they want out of people, like they squeezed governments to send troops to Iraq despite 80-90% (in Spain, 92%) public opposition to that. If not for American pressure, IAEA would have handled Iran the "OK" ticket and dropped the issue. Whenever various countries voting somewhere against Iran, Syria, Palestine, let Rademaker's admission bell in your ears: "...the votes were coerced." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
a big pile of bs covered with a thick layer of sugar
|
|
|
Fredledingue
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +30/-31
Posts: 868
|
|
« Reply #12 on: November 01, 2007, 02:22:11 PM » |
|
PeisithanatosIndia coerced in a vote inside the non-proliferation context? Ho!  The irony of international politics is simply... halucinating. India was not moraly in a position to vote against Iran since they did exactely what Iran is doing now, 10 years ago. But civilian nuclear cooperation with the US helped them to overcome or forget this annoyance. Also don't forget that... The former Bush administration official claimed Iran was developing nuclear weapons and that the international community was going to have to take tougher measures to persuade Iran to change course. "Whether there will be more U.N. sanctions or more measures taken outside the U.N. context, we'll have to see." Russia, said Mr. Rademaker, was "not fully cooperating" with the U.S.
"If the U.N. Security Council acts against Iran, this would make things easier for countries like India. But if things go in the direction of increasing economic pressure by a coalition of countries like the U.S, Europe and Japan, India will have to make a choice," he said. India would have to decide whether to join these countries in the economic measures they took. "It is India's prerogative to decide, but should it (not join), it would be a big mistake and a lost opportunity," he added. Zee,IAEA's inspectors in Spain are making routine controls of the atom fuel. They don't make inspection and investigations like in Iran.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Dr. Zoidberg is jewish (and an important AIPAC donator!) |
|
|
|
Peisithanatos
|
|
« Reply #13 on: November 01, 2007, 08:57:21 PM » |
|
am not getting u, Freddie, - are you doubting India's unwillingness or making fun of it?
Americans pressure everyone (anyone they can) about such issues. From the same source:
"Do you think other member states of the Governors' Board of the IAEA
were also put under pressure by the US and its European allies to vote
against Iran? If so what evidence is there for such coercion?
SV: Undoubtedly. I recently had the occasion to meet a senior delegation from a European member country of the P5+1. Privately, these officials, who deal with Iran, were skeptical about the current US approach but said their government was unable to resist Washington's pressure. If this is the case with a major European power, you can imagine the fate of "lesser" IAEA Board members."
Euros are shamelessly giving up to American pressures. Like they did with Iraq; difference now is that the last independent voice on the continent, France, is parrotting after Washington. Albeit, Spain has improved on the other hand. War with Iran will be the grave of this world order.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
a big pile of bs covered with a thick layer of sugar
|
|
|
|
