Ahmadinejad claims full nuclearization within a year.

[Little Raven]

Also claims that the West has agreed to live with a nuclear Iran, though it's unclear exactly what he means by that.

anian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday said Iran would celebrate the completion of its controversial nuclear fuel program within Iran's current calendar year, which ends on March 20.

"With the wisdom and resistance of the nation, today our position has stabilized. I'm very hopeful that we will be able to hold the big celebration of Iran's full nuclearization in the current year," the hard-line president told reporters during a press conference.

The hard-line president also claimed that the international community was caving in to Teheran's demands to continue its nuclear program.

"Initially, they (the US and its allies) were very angry. The reason was clear: They basically wanted to monopolize nuclear power in order to rule the world and impose their will on nations," Ahmadinejad said.

"Today, they have finally agreed to live with a nuclear Iran, with an Iran possessing a nuclear fuel cycle," he said, without elaborating.

Unfortunately, there's a good chance he's right...about both parts.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out.

 

[JohnRM]

Somebody has got to stop these people.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Nobody stopped us.

 

[JohnRM]

Nobody stopped us.

Nobody could, and dammit, I warn you, if you try to compare us to these really cool guys, this conversation is over.

Moderator Action: Sidestepping the autocensor does not validate your troll post. Warned. - The Yankee
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Little Raven]

Somebody has got to stop these people.

Nobody can. And everyone knows it.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Nobody could, and dammit, I warn you, if you try to compare us to these aholes, this conversation is over.

John, Im ok with the conversation being over, if thats what you want, but do you realise that you just called an ancient people who played a major role in creating our current civilization 'aholes'? The world didnt begin in 1776 And I will compare them to us, because we're all just people.

 

[Rambuchan]

Good for them.

because we're all just people.

Indeed. Equality means equality, not some more equal than others. Double standards are smeared all over "the Iranian issue".

So many more belligerent nations have nuclear weapons, let alone nuclear power. Both the USA and UK still do business with those and even sell them arms whilst they invade other countries. And how many other nations have Iran invaded?

The Iranians want what we, the USA/UK, take for granted in nuclear power. We play schoolmaster wagging our finger at them, whilst we set a really shocking example of peacefulness. I don't blame them for totally ignoring the US/UK preaching, patronising and meddling. We simply don't have the right to do so, especially given our actions in their region.

Moreover, any weapons they are accused of wanting to develop are entirely understandable given the 'axis of evil' speech and the fact that two of their direct neighbours have already been invaded by a belligerent coalition comprised in the main by two powers that have historically meddled in Iran's affairs and oil industry.


PS. What a source to post such a news item from!

 

[Masquerouge]

Can't say I'm surprised or scared.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Good for them.

Indeed. Equality means equality, not some more equal than others. Double standards are smeared all over "the Iranian issue".

So many more belligerent nations have nuclear weapons, let alone nuclear power. Both the USA and UK still do business with those and even sell them arms whilst they invade other countries. And how many other nations have Iran invaded?

The Iranians want what we, the USA/UK, take for granted in nuclear power. We play schoolmaster wagging our finger at them, whilst we set a really shocking example of peacefulness. I don't blame them for totally ignoring the US/UK preaching, patronising and meddling. We simply don't have the right to do so, especially given our actions in their region.

Moreover, any weapons they are accused of wanting to develop are entirely understandable given the 'axis of evil' speech and the fact that two of their direct neighbours have already been invaded by a belligerent coalition comprised in the main by two powers that have historically meddled in Iran's affairs and oil industry.

The future (assuming there is one) will laugh at us for attempting to keep nukes to ourselves. Just as we'd laugh at people before us attempting to stop the spread of crossbow technology.

 

[blackheart]

The future (assuming there is one) will laugh at us for attempting to keep nukes to ourselves. Just as we'd laugh at people before us attempting to stop the spread of crossbow technology.

Just as we laugh at the west's attempt to keep steam-engine technology from Japan and China.

 

[StarWorms]

*ahem* North Korea? We've practically given North Korea the go-ahead to make nuclear weapons. People should be focusing on North Korea not Iran. Too much talk and not enough action because ******** leaders have led us into an illegal war in Iraq. That's bad leadership for you.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Can't say I'm surprised or scared.

Same here. If he was stupid enough to try anything, his ass would be toast.

 

[neutrino]

Ahmadinejad will probably get his way, as Iran has pretty much neutralised the UN Security Council: if the US proposes to impose tougher sanctions or any similar moves, then Russia and China will veto. (Iran has become a major importer of Russian weapons and nuclear tech, China has become a major importer of Iranian natural gas and oil.) France has been sort of in the middle between the US/UK and Russia/China: Iran is not only in the process of acquiring its own nukes, but also working on ballistic missiles that has enough range to reach Europe. however, France has been leaning towards not taking tougher stand, as it is obvious that the UNSC will not go anywhere. UK may behave like France at the end.

though, problem w/ Iran is that it has potential to destabilise the Middle East to a greater extent than anyone else. the Hizbollah (which is under Iran's payroll) has pactically taken Lebanon as hostage. many Gulf States have substantial Shia population within which Iran can aid radical elements. Iranians have already been supporting the most radical Iraqi Shia factions. a nuclear-armed Iran may try to capitalise its growing power to indulge in more brinkmanship in the future.

 

[BloodyPepperoni]

I have no problems with a nuclear Iran, but I have no problem with Israel blowing up their nuclear reactors either.

 

[zenspiderz]

Good for them.

Indeed. Equality means equality, not some more equal than others. Double standards are smeared all over "the Iranian issue".

So many more belligerent nations have nuclear weapons, let alone nuclear power. Both the USA and UK still do business with those and even sell them arms whilst they invade other countries. And how many other nations have Iran invaded?

The Iranians want what we, the USA/UK, take for granted in nuclear power. We play schoolmaster wagging our finger at them, whilst we set a really shocking example of peacefulness. I don't blame them for totally ignoring the US/UK preaching, patronising and meddling. We simply don't have the right to do so, especially given our actions in their region.

Moreover, any weapons they are accused of wanting to develop are entirely understandable given the 'axis of evil' speech and the fact that two of their direct neighbours have already been invaded by a belligerent coalition comprised in the main by two powers that have historically meddled in Iran's affairs and oil industry.


PS. What a source to post such a news item from!

As ever Rammy you are the voice of reason (alongside me of course!)

I second you opine.

Also is that article loaded or what? .. twice described ahmadinejad as 'hard-line'. How hypnotic.. Why not just call him the Iranian president? or by his name... propaganda in action IMHO.

 

[Sidhe]

Ahmadinejad will probably get his way, as Iran has pretty much neutralised the UN Security Council: if the US proposes to impose tougher sanctions or any similar moves, then Russia and China will veto. (Iran has become a major importer of Russian weapons and nuclear tech, China has become a major importer of Iranian natural gas and oil.) France has been sort of in the middle between the US/UK and Russia/China: Iran is not only in the process of acquiring its own nukes, but also working on ballistic missiles that has enough range to reach Europe. however, France has been leaning towards not taking tougher stand, as it is obvious that the UNSC will not go anywhere. UK may behave like France at the end.

though, problem w/ Iran is that it has potential to destabilise the Middle East to a greater extent than anyone else. the Hizbollah (which is under Iran's payroll) has pactically taken Lebanon as hostage. many Gulf States have substantial Shia population within which Iran can aid radical elements. Iranians have already been supporting the most radical Iraqi Shia factions. a nuclear-armed Iran may try to capitalise its growing power to indulge in more brinkmanship in the future.

Iran does have another reason to produce nuclear energy other than as a means to gain nukes. The cost of oil to run power stations, as opposed to profit when sold to other countries: the more nuclear power it uses to supply it's country with power instead of oil, the more free oil it has to sell, thus it's profit margin leaps quite considerably.

That is part of the reason why the US gave the Shah the technology to start building nuclear facilities in the first place, for oil concessions. Let's try not to forget it was the US that kicked this whole process off by supplying the initial technology and reactors, the problem is that they could not forsee the Shah being deposed and a rise to power of a non alied government. They are right to be worried but under the Non Proliferation Treaty(NPT) So far, there is no proof other than speculation that Iran has done anything wrong, nuclear power is not against said NPT. Thus in actuallity all the UN really has to offer is that weapons inspectors gain access to their plants, they have no right to stop their facilities, and in fact asking them to do so singles out Iran for a different treaty than the rest of the UN countries agreed to, which they understandablly see as unfair.

 

[Ball Lightning]

Like seriously, who cares? I don't.

 

[JollyRoger]

India, Pakistan, and Israel all have nukes. Why not Iran?

 

[Ball Lightning]

India, Pakistan, and Israel all have nukes. Why not Iran?

Exactly my point, and they don't even want nukes!!