Iran: The Trigger For World War III? - Page 13 - Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions

prometheus · 09-11-05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy the Kidd

I dont buy that, thats what they say of course and yet England fought wars all over the globe at the same time for 100s of years. I am amazed that one time when they lose, not only the war but thier balls it becomes an issue of that.

I don't really know or care... I think it was right that England got booted out of America, as the English government did not represent the views of the American people... At this point in time though, people were still fighting with horses and swords. England's real military might came in the 19th century... This is also when the Empire committed some of its worst atrocities...

I know that some of my countrymen were giving the English a very hard time at this point... Some of my ancestors were Highlanders from the clans MacDonald and MacNaughton, so they were probably among the sympathisers with the Stewart Pretender...

Synikul · 09-11-05

Quote:

Originally Posted by prometheus

I hope that I mentioned that it is not my opinion that the USA didn't do enough... You have to remember that a lot of the War Vets over here are very bitter old men now...

Didn't they say something like "The problem with American G.I.s is that they're overpaid, oversexed, and over here."?

What do you think of this?

prometheus · 09-12-05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synikul

Didn't they say something like "The problem with American G.I.s is that they're overpaid, oversexed, and over here."?

What do you think of this?

Apparently, they were over here for some time after the war when my mother was a teenager, and my grandmother was fabulously offended by them...

Synikul · 09-16-05

Back to Iran. BOMB THEM NOW!

Quote:

Iran 'may share nuclear know-how'

UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- Iran's president has told Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan that his country is ready and willing to give peaceful nuclear technology to Islamic states, the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency reported Thursday.

"The Islamic Republic never seeks weapons of mass destruction and with respect to the needs of Islamic countries, we are ready to transfer nuclear know-how to these countries," said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a meeting with Erdogan during this week's U.N. World Summit.

FULL ARTICLE

prometheus · 09-17-05

What, use our Peace Keeping Devices to take out Iran's Weapons of Mass Destruction?

If you want to rid the World of WMD, I can think of a few military installations in the USA that would be an excellent place to start...

B'Aqu-anir · 09-17-05

Quote:

Originally Posted by prometheus

What, use our Peace Keeping Devices to take out Iran's Weapons of Mass Destruction?

If you want to rid the World of WMD, I can think of a few military installations in the USA that would be an excellent place to start...

They could start with Ellsworth AFB in South Dakota.

Dyshade · 09-17-05

I think that if they want Nuclear Power they should allow the United States or another peaceful country to build and operate one under guard by the UN.

Billy the Kidd · 09-17-05

Why should the USA get rid of its nuclear arsenal? We arent unhinged psychotics trying to force Islam on everyone.

Cucking Funt · 09-19-05

Iranian president Mahmud's speech to the UN security council.

Quote:

Today we have gathered here to exchange views about the world, its future and our common responsibilities towards it. It is evident that the future of the world is intertwined with its current state and the prevailing trends, which exhibit signs of hope and despair.

Quote:

On the one hand certain hopes and opportunities exist, and this August the assembly is convened on such hopes...

"We believe that all countries and nations are entitled to technological and scientific advancement in all fields, particularly the peaceful technology to produce nuclear fuel - such access cannot be restricted to a few"

The prevalence of military domination, increasing poverty, the growing gap between rich and poor countries, violence as a means to solve crises, spread of terrorism, especially state terrorism, existence and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the pervasive lack of honesty in interstate relations, and disregard for the equal rights of peoples and nations in international relations, constitute some of the challenges and threats.

Although these challenges are very real, we believe we are not predestined to experience them. We can not only change this course but in fact can lead us to a life filled with hope and prosperity...

'Discriminatory approach'

Can nations be deprived of scientific and technological progress through the threat of use of force and based on mere allegations of possibility of military diversion? We believe that all countries and nations are entitled to technological and scientific advancement in all fields, particularly the peaceful technology to produce nuclear fuel.

Such access cannot be restricted to a few, depriving most nations and by establishing economic monopolies, use them as an instrument to expand their domination. ..

Some powerful states practice a discriminatory approach against access of Non-Proliferation Treaty members to material, equipment, and peaceful nuclear technology, and by doing so intend to impose a nuclear apartheid. We are concerned that once certain powerful states completely control nuclear energy resources and technology, they will deny access to other states and thus deepen the divide between powerful countries and the rest of the international community...

What needs our particular attention is the fact that peaceful use of nuclear energy without possession of nuclear fuel cycle is an empty proposition.

Nuclear power plants can indeed lead to total dependence of countries and peoples if they need to rely for their fuel on coercive powers, who do not refrain from any measure in furtherance of their interests. No popularly elected and responsible government can consider such a situation in the interest of its people. The history of dependence on oil in oil-rich countries under domination is an experiment that no independent country is willing to repeat.

'Propaganda ploy'

Those hegemonic powers, who consider scientific and technological progress of independent and free nations as a challenge to their monopoly on these important instruments of power and who do not want to see such achievements in other countries, have misrepresented Iran's healthy and fully safeguarded technological endeavours in the nuclear field as pursuit of nuclear weapons.

This is nothing but a propaganda ploy. The Islamic Republic of Iran is presenting in good faith its proposal for constructive interaction and a just dialogue.

However, if some try to impose their will on the Iranian people through resort to a language of force and threat with Iran, we will reconsider our entire approach to the nuclear issue. Allow me, as the elected president of the Iranian people, to outline the other main elements of my country's initiative regarding the nuclear issue:

1. The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates its previously and repeatedly declared position that in accordance with our religious principles, pursuit of nuclear weapons is prohibited.

2. The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that it is necessary to revitalise the NPT and create the above-mentioned ad-hoc committee so that it can combat nuclear weapons and abolish the apartheid in peaceful nuclear technology.

3. Technically, the fuel cycle of the Islamic Republic of Iran is not different from that of other countries which have peaceful nuclear technology. Therefore, as a further confidence-building measure and in order to provide the greatest degree of transparency, the Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to engage in serious partnership with private and public sectors of other countries in the implementation of uranium enrichment programme in Iran. This represents the most far-reaching step, outside all requirements of the NPT, being proposed by Iran as a further confidence building measure.

4. In keeping with Iran's inalienable right to have access to a nuclear fuel cycle, continued interaction and technical and legal cooperation with the IAEA will be the centrepiece of our nuclear policy. Initiation and continuation of negotiations with other countries will be carried out in the context of Iran's interaction with the agency. With this in mind, I have directed the relevant Iranian officials to compile the legal and technical details, of Iran's nuclear approach, based on the following considerations:

4.1. International precedence tells us that nuclear fuel-delivery contracts are unreliable and no legally binding international document or instrument exists to guarantee the delivery of nuclear fuel. On many occasions such bilateral contracts have either been suspended or stopped altogether for political reasons. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran, in its pursuit of peaceful nuclear technology, considers it within its legitimate rights to receive objective guarantees for uranium enrichment in the nuclear fuel cycle.

4.2. In its negotiations with the EU, Iran has tried in earnest to prove the solid and rightful foundations of its nuclear activity in the context of the NPT, and to establish mutual trust. The selection of our negotiating partners and the continuation of negotiations with the EU will be commensurate with the requirements of our cooperation with the agency regarding non-diversion of the process of uranium enrichment to non-peaceful purposes in the framework of the provisions of the NPT. In this context, several proposals have been presented which can be considered in the context of negotiations...

4.3. The discriminatory approaches regarding the NPT that focuses on the obligations of state-parties and disregards their rights under the Treaty should be discontinued. .. My country will interact and cooperate constructively with the international community to face the challenges before us.

Timeline: Iran nuclear crisis

Chronology of key events since 2002:

August 2002: Iranian exiles say that Tehran has built a vast uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and a heavy water plant at Arak without informing the United Nations.

September 2002: Construction work begins on Iran's first nuclear reactor at the Bushehr power plant.

December 2002: The existence of sites at Natanz and Arak is confirmed by satellite photographs shown on US television. The US accuses Tehran of "across-the-board pursuit of weapons of mass destruction". Iran agrees to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA).

February 2003: Iranian President Mohammed Khatami reveals that Iran has unearthed uranium deposits and announces plans to develop a nuclear fuel cycle. IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei travels to Iran with a team of inspectors to begin probing Tehran's nuclear plans.

June 2003: Mr ElBaradei accuses Iran of not revealing the extent of its nuclear work, and urges leaders to sign up for more intrusive inspections.

August 2003: Traces of highly enriched weapons-grade uranium found at Natanz.

September 2003: More enriched uranium discovered, prompting urgent calls for Iran to sign a voluntary protocol formalising a tougher inspection regime.

October 2003: After meeting French, German and UK foreign ministers, Tehran agrees to stop producing enriched uranium and formally decides to sign the Additional Protocol. No evidence is produced to confirm the end of enrichment.

November 2003: Mr ElBaradei says there is "no evidence" that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. The US disagrees.

December 2003: Iran signs the protocol at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna.

February 2004: Abdul Qadeer Khan, the godfather of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, is reported to have sold Iran nuclear weapons technology.

February 2004: IAEA report says Iran experimented with polonium-210, which can be used to trigger the chain reaction in a nuclear bomb. Iran did not explain the experiments. Iran again agrees to suspend enrichment, but again does not.

March 2004: Iran urged to reveal its entire nuclear programme to the IAEA by 1 June 2004.

June 2004: Tehran is criticised by the IAEA for trying to import magnets for centrifuges and for not offering "full, timely and pro-active" co-operation with inspectors.

September 2004: IAEA orders Iran to stop preparations for a large-scale uranium enrichment. US Secretary of State Colin Powell labels Iran a growing danger and calls for the UN Security Council to impose sanctions. Iran says it has resumed large-scale conversion of uranium ore into gas.

November 2004: Iran agrees to halt all enrichment activities during talks with the three European Union states, but pledges to resume in the future.

January 2005: IAEA inspectors allowed into the secretive Parchin plant near Tehran.

April 2005: Iran announces plans to resume uranium conversion at Isfahan.

May 2005: EU states warn that any resumption of conversion would end negotiations linked to trade and economic issues. Iran agrees to wait for detailed proposals from the Europeans at the end of July.

August 2005: Hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is installed as Iranian president, as Tehran pledges an "irreversible" resumption of enrichment.

Iran rejects the latest European proposals for resolving the nuclear crisis.

Iran appoints a hardline politician, Ali Larijani, to lead the country's nuclear talks with the European Union.

Iran resumes sensitive fuel cycle work at its uranium conversion facility near the city of Isfahan.

An independent investigation finds no evidence that Iran was working on a secret nuclear weapons programme. It concludes that traces of bomb-grade uranium in Iran's nuclear facilities came from contaminated Pakistani equipment, not Iranian activities. The US dismisses the report.

September 2005: A study by the International Institute for Strategic Studies concludes that Iran is still several years away from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.

Speaking before the UN General Assembly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says his country has an "inalienable right" to produce nuclear fuel.

Synikul · 09-19-05

Quote:

the pervasive lack of honesty in interstate relations, and disregard for the equal rights of peoples and nations in international relations, constitute some of the challenges and threats.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

An Iranian is talking about equal rights! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Quote:

violence as a means to solve crises, spread of terrorism, especially state terrorism,

An Iranian is bemoaning the spread of state sponsored terrorism!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Does the word Hamas mean anything to you?

Quote:

Can nations be deprived of scientific and technological progress through the threat of use of force and based on mere allegations of possibility of military diversion?

Yes, because yours is a nation ruled by Islamic NUTCASES, and we're not going to let you have any nuclear bombs. You have no right to appeal this decision. You will either comply, or be attacked. The choice is yours.

prometheus · 09-21-05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synikul

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

An Iranian is talking about equal rights! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

An Iranian is bemoaning the spread of state sponsored terrorism!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Does the word Hamas mean anything to you?

Yes, because yours is a nation ruled by Islamic NUTCASES, and we're not going to let you have any nuclear bombs. You have no right to appeal this decision. You will either comply, or be attacked. The choice is yours.

Much as I don't like the idea of Iran proliferating nuclear weapons technology throughout the middle east, it has to be said that Bush isn't exactly the sanest of cunts...

Billy the Kidd · 09-21-05

Quote:

Originally Posted by prometheus

Much as I don't like the idea of Iran proliferating nuclear weapons technology throughout the middle east, it has to be said that Bush isn't exactly the sanest of cunts...

Actually he is completely sane, the fact that you dont like him is no justification for calling him insane. he simply belongs to a political philosophy you dont like.