Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
TEHRAN, Iran — Senior Iranian lawmakers rejected on Saturday any possibility of Tehran shipping uranium abroad for further enrichment, intensifying pressures on the government to reject the U.N.-backed plan altogether.
"Nothing will be given of the 1,200 kilograms (of low enriched uranium) ... to the other side in exchange for 20 percent enriched fuel, not in one batch nor in several. It is out of question," the semiofficial ISNA news agency quoted Boroujerdi as saying Saturday.
The UN-brokered plan required Iran to send 1.2 tons of low-enriched uranium — around 70 percent of its stockpile — to Russia in one batch by the end of the year, easing concerns the material would be used for a bomb.
***************************
How many times must Iran spit in our face before we actually show them we're serious about stopping their nuclear ambitions?
Yet another thread where the OP seems to think that one Country not going along with what other countries tell it do is "spitting in their face".
We can have nuclear weapons but the Iranians cannot.
Israel can have nuclear weapons but the Iranians cannot.
The is your modern day fake "Conservative" ........they want to meddle in the affairs of other countries!
They can't stop themselves......................... They need a "boogey man" to focus their paranoid fears on.
See the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which Iran is a signatory, and Israel is not, for your answers. A basic knowledge of nuclear affairs is needed to participate in a grown-up conversation such as this.
See the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which Iran is a signatory, and Israel is not, for your answers. A basic knowledge of nuclear affairs is needed to participate in a grown-up conversation such as this.
Oh you're very concerned about adhering to UN treaties now?....LOL
That's a laugher. The USA breaks treaties every week. And you couldn't care less.
But let's say Iran IS breaking a treaty?......Again so what?
A country can renounce or break a treaty anytime they wish and they are STILL not legally subject to attack by other countries.
You have this odd problem of not being able to apply the same set of standards.
It's a mentality of a 3rd grader...there are "good guys" and "bad guys" and principles and laws do not matter if breaking them benefits "your side".
You are a rank authoritarian...you are as far from a true Conservative as you can get.
Oh you're very concerned about adhering to UN treaties now?....LOL
That's a laugher. The USA breaks treaties every week. And you couldn't care less.
But let's say Iran IS breaking a treaty?......Again so what?
A country can renounce or break a treaty anytime they wish and they are STILL not legally subject to attack by other countries.
You have this odd problem of not being able to apply the same set of standards.
It's a mentality of a 3rd grader...there are "good guys" and "bad guys" and principles and laws do not matter if breaking them benefits "your side".
You are a rank authoritarian...you are a far from a true Conservative as you can get.
1) Need to see a list of the treaties the US breaks "every week."
2) Of course Iran could withdraw from the treaty (just as North Korea did); but the big question is why haven't they? Because they realize that by doing so they offer definitive proof that their nuclear ambitions are anything but peaceful. North Korea backed out because they had no intentions of hiding their program. If anything, they wanted the world to know it. Iran backed itself into a corner by signing the Treaty. Withdraw now, show your hand. Remain a signatory, and hope to Allah that the UN will mimick weakling U.S. Democrats and turn a blind eye.
1) Need to see a list of the treaties the US breaks "every week."
2) Of course Iran could withdraw from the treaty (just as North Korea did); but the big question is why haven't they? Because they realize that by doing so they offer definitive proof that their nuclear ambitions are anything but peaceful. North Korea backed out because they had no intentions of hiding their program. If anything, they wanted the world to know it. Iran backed itself into a corner by signing the Treaty. Withdraw now, show your hand. Remain a signatory, and hope to Allah that the UN will mimick U.S. Democrats and turn a blind eye.
Why don't you have the courage of your convictions to admit you want to bomb Iran to force them to comply with US wishes?
You want to attack another country (which will cause civilian deaths) because you perceive a "good outcome" coming from it?
Why don't you have the courage of your convictions to admit you want to bomb Iran to force them to comply with US wishes?
You want to attack another country (which will cause civilian deaths) because you perceive a "good outcome" coming from it?
You're a keyboad warmonger. Be proud!
When the leader of a radical theocracy threatens to wipe another country off the map, and said theocracy is known to be pursuing weapons of mass destruction, it is incumbent upon the international community to do what is necessary to stop that destruction.
If that means bombing nuclear reactors in Iran, then yes, I am all for it. Does that mean that I don't prefer a diplomatic solution? Of course i'd rather it be worked out diplomatically. But at what point does the international community stop dragging its feet? Iran just spat in the face of the UN once again. As George W. Bush put it, the UN is facing irrelvancy with every passing day. This latest development is the latest proof of that. Its time for the UN to put up, or shut up.
When the leader of a radical theocracy threatens to wipe another country off the map, and said theocracy is known to be pursuing weapons of mass destruction, it is incumbent upon the international community to do what is necessary to stop that destruction.
If that means bombing nuclear reactors in Iran, then yes, I am all for it. Does that mean that I don't prefer a diplomatic solution? Of course i'd rather it be worked out diplomatically. But at what point does the international community stop dragging its feet? Iran just spat in the face of the UN once again. As George W. Bush put it, the UN is facing irrelvancy with every passing day. This latest development is the latest proof of that. Its time for the UN to put up, or shut up.
Great we are making progress. You admit you want to break Intenational Law and attack another country for trying to obtain the same weapons Israel has.
So could you at least spare us the bull**** about how concerned you are about breaking treaties???
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
