Iran President, "We Love You America"

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

Hasbizawha wha!?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060921/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_general_assembly

UNITED NATIONS - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted Thursday that Tehran doesn't need atomic weapons and he is "at a loss" about what more he can do to prove that. Ahmadinejad said his country has not hidden anything and was working within the framework of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

ADVERTISEMENT




"The bottom line is we do not need a bomb," he said at a news conference on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly.

The nations seeking to halt Iran's disputed nuclear activities are working out a new deadline for the Islamic republic and have authorized the European Union's foreign policy chief to go anywhere at any time to meet Tehran's top nuclear negotiator.

Despite the possible new accommodations, diplomats said they're not willing to wait much longer for Iran to respond more definitively to their package of incentives to stop uranium enrichment.

Ahmadinejad said he believed negotiations on the issue were "on the right track."

"Our position on suspension is very clear," Ahmadinejad said. "Under fair and just conditions ... we will negotiate about it."

He said the Iranians "want to make sure that everything we agree on" has a guarantee but they were not looking for security measures.

"We are able to protect ourselves and our security," he said. "What we speak of are guarantees of enforcement of provisions that are agreed upon."

He also accused the U.S. of having a double standard and said it should destroy its own nuclear arsenal, which would make it "less suspicious of others."

He questioned what the U.S. has done to shut down its weapons program. "They too need to submit a report" to the International Atomic Energy Agency on its nuclear program, he said. "We've acted in a very transparent manner."

Ahmadinejad, whose country has been accused of smuggling weapons to the Islamic militant group Hezbollah, which fought a 34-day war with Israel this summer, said Lebanon's internal affairs were its own concern.

"We give spiritual support to all those who want to support their rights," he said when asked about whether Iran is arming Hezbollah. He added that Iran supports "permanent stability in Lebanon, and we will fall short of no means in supporting this goal."

The hard-line Iranian leader also reached out to the American people, two days after President Bush addressed himself to the Iranian public.

"The people of the United States are highly respected by us ... many people in the United States believe in God and believe in justice," he said.

In response to a question by an Israeli TV reporter on his past remarks that he sought the destruction of Israel, Ahmadinejad hesitated before responding.

"We love everyone in the world — Jews, Christians, Muslims, non-Muslims, non-Jews, non-Christians," he said. "We are against ugly acts. We are against occupation, aggression, killings and displacing people — otherwise we have no problem with ordinary people."

"Everyone is respected. ... We declare this in a loud voice," he said.

With world leaders gathered at the United Nations, the United States had hoped to move decisively this week toward political and economic sanctions against Iran after it missed an Aug. 31 U.N. Security Council deadline to halt uranium enrichment.

The oil-rich nation insists the program has the peaceful purpose of producing fuel for nuclear reactors that generate electricity. But the United States and other countries fear Iran's goal is to build a nuclear arsenal and transform the balance of power in the Middle East.

A dinner meeting Tuesday with Beckett, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the foreign ministers of France, Russia, China, Germany and Italy produced little consensus about the next step, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said. He said the diplomatic effort to counter Iran was in "extra innings."

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said Wednesday the nations leading efforts to halt Iran's uranium enrichment are working on a new deadline for Tehran to provide a more definitive response, despite differences over sanctions.

France also is pushing a compromise proposal that would have Iran suspend uranium enrichment at the same time as a Security Council suspension of all threats of sanctions.

[Mechs]

He also accused the U.S. of having a double standard and said it should destroy its own nuclear arsenal, which would make it "less suspicious of others."

:rofl: I needed the laugh.

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

:rofl: I needed the laugh.

From his perspective that probably sounded like a really smart thing to say...

So did, "...the complete destruction of the Zionist", so you really can't count on him to be sane.

What's funny is that he's palying to the people of his country. He is insane and completely dishonest, but when he's at the UN, "Hi everyone, I'm going to be nice now so everyone could be destracted. Nevermind that I've constantly met with Hugo Chavez and Kim Jon Il who are thorns in the worlds side."

Actually I'm starting to wonder where the hell Chavez gets the odasity to say what he is saying? It might be a war of words at the moment and I'm glad they were able to keep it civil at the UN, but pretty soon someone is going to do something stupid.

This time I actually think it isn't going to be us.

[Masa the Masta]

audacity^

Sorry, but y'know...English majors and all that..


Yeah, honestly I wouldn't really feel bad about Iran having uranium, so long as they aren't using it for bombs. Maybe they can have foreign controlled nuclear power plants or something, with all the uranium accounted for? I don't know.

[Radiance]

audacity^

Sorry, but y'know...English majors and all that..


Yeah, honestly I wouldn't really feel bad about Iran having uranium, so long as they aren't using it for bombs. Maybe they can have foreign controlled nuclear power plants or something, with all the uranium accounted for? I don't know.

Y'know, I really wish that was an option. UN controlled power plants.... Unfortunatly you know that would only result in "US controlled blah blah blah" or "Taking away Iranian jobs!"

So... out of curiosity, anyone know if the middle east has been having record droughts for the past few years? I mean wouldn't it be nice if they weren't all just crazy and were instead hallucinating from a lack of water. :D

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

They live in a vast desert.

Yes.

[Pierrot le Fou]

Yes, we should give them nuclear power under the guarantee that they won't make bombs. Like we did with North Korea. Because that worked out so well.

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

Well the problem is that we tried the same thing with NK and then poop, "Oh yeah, we have nukes."

We don't want the same thing to happen because I think Iran will actually launch them and Kim Jon is so insane he doesn't even know how to press the button.

[Kass]

Yeah, honestly I wouldn't really feel bad about Iran having uranium, so long as they aren't using it for bombs. Maybe they can have foreign controlled nuclear power plants or something, with all the uranium accounted for? I don't know.

Yes, we can absolutely trust a country that provides the vast majority of funding for terrorist groups to not develop nuclear weapons because they pinky swore they wouldn't do that.

[Y.T.]

I think every country needs a well guarded nuclear arsenal.
The means of delivery should be limited to aircraft, spies
suicide squads or so.. Not missiles. And nukes of different
states should have slightly different compositions.. so that
it can be established who did it.
Missiles are so impersonal.
I betcha the US would not invade Grenada if it had some
of those very nice small nukes.
Those are much better than carbombs, by the way.

Atomic war is great if you need to solve some
problems with overcrowding. And nukes are great tools
of for slum clearance..

[Sock Full of Boiled Dimes]

And nukes are great tools
of for slum clearance..

You are also the sum of insanity.

[Y.T.]

Radioactivity is not a big deal. The Chernobyl Area has become a breeding ground
for all kinds of endangered species of mammals. There are lots of beavers (nearly hunted to extinction in most Europe, Moose, supposedly Visent also and Lynx(es). The animals are
too radioactive to eat and show some genetic damage from radioactiviy, yet they
still survive and their numbers are increasing.

The Chernobyl accident was much, much more dirty than a nuclear detonation.
The graphite in reactor core burned and the smoke that rose from it contained radioactive particles of all kinds.
If you detonated ten or twenty nuclear warheads with yields in the tens of kilotons, you
probably would not get as much "fallout" as was created during that disaster.

Let me quote (or perhaps paraphrase) Orwell. He wrote in an essay, after WWII, that if the nuclear bomb is hard to manufacture and requires a large infrastructure to make, it will cause the inordinate rise in power for those countries that have it, and concentrate real power in the world to the hands of a small group of people..
Look it up in history books. As long as rifle and the machinegun
was the dominant weapon system, small countries could hold their own against
empires. Finns were not absorbed into the USSR. A russian general said, that
they conquered enough land to bury their dead, up to 1 million.
Individually, some Finns personally killed hundreds of Soviets. The highest
score is 400 something for one sniper. Though
a major part croaked because of harsh winter, starvation (Finns often tried
encirclement, because their infantry was more mobile than Russian forces)..
The Balkan countries succesfully rebelled against Turk rule. Colonies gained independence. (South America). The US was created during an
armed struggle against a colonial power. Rifles were the weapon of the day.
Do you think that would happen if empires of the day had nukes?
(google Orwell's essay on this. He saw things others did not. )

It is an undemocratic weapon. If North Vietnam had nukes, do you think the US would attack? Do you know what a nuclear detonation does to surface ships? Would their use of a nuke be unjust after US dropped more explosives on their country than was dropped in WWII? They used
megatons of explosive. I am no admirer of communist dictatures, but the older I get,
the more I think that Vietnam was not about "checking the spread of communism",
but the real cause was something else. The people in power rarely do something
without making a cover story. Like the Iraq war.
I love what Wolfowitz said. It makes me feel all warm inside.
He said, that they agreed to spin the WMDs in the media before that war
because of bureaucratic reasons. Such honesty!

"Sum of insanity?" Am I more or less insane than people who claim all the
truth they need can be found in one small book?

[Plekto]

A small side note:

Israel has at last count, something like 150-200 nuclear missiles pointed at - hell, wherever they want them. This, combined with actions like they recently did in Lebanon makes them a de-facto rogue state just like most of the others in the area.

So, yes, it's very easy to see how it would scare Iran. They don't have more than a handful of nukes, mostly smuggled in from Russia and N. Korea and other places at least a decade ago - that are rapidly aging or now almost useless.(same as Cuba, btw) But no infrastructure to make more than maybe one every few years the old-fashioned brute-force way(like the U.S/Germany/Japan were doing in WWII). Half a dozen warheads with no ability to make more quickly doesn't make you a player, it makes you a target.

And Iran has no real need to become a nuclear state(tm). They appear to want to be left alone like Saudi Arabia. And of course, fund terrorists exactly like Saudi Arabia. (ie - it's this part that needs to be addressed, not invading their country) I bet if we gave them a real guarantee to leave them alone and actually DID, in exchange for turning a blind eye to the rest of the area's problems, they would do it. Of course, our word is worth 2 cents right now, so that's unlikely to convince them.

[Y.T.]

You seriously underestimate Iranians.

They are first and foremost Iranians. Secondly they are Mohamedans.
They work hard, and are modernist in their attitude towards technology.


If they had a nuke, they would be able to maintain it.
Any country that can produce high quality explosives can.
The half life of the plutonium in bombs is 24000yrs.

My roommate during the past year was an Iranian.
A very strange fella. Gentleman, in that that he was
always impecabbly dressed, even watched videos on
proper etiquette. When I moved in to his room, the
bin was full of used condoms.
He has a czech girlfriend,
(older, with a degree, already working)
and he has an doc file with every SMS of poetry he has sent
her since they started going out together two years ago.
They displayed such physical affection that it made me
uncomfortable to be in the same room when she visited.

He is studying radiology at the Czech Institute of Nuclear
Engineering and at the same time he is "distantly" ?
studying mechanical engineering at the Liberec Technical University.

He dislikes Arabs as every Iranian. They consider them inferior,
lazy, etc.. I suspect they are right.

The only disagreements we had concerned temperature..
I love frigid air and hate smell, he prefered the hot, humid
and smelly atmosphere. He was also perplexed by the amount of
time I spent "not studying". He is not noticeably sharper than I am.

I admire him. I'll be very pleased with myself If I'll
ever work so hard. Though his habit of occupying the bathroom
for 45 minutes before going out was ..
I have long hair and I am done in 20 minutes.
(Showering with cold water helps to keep the time spent
showering to minimum).