Iran issues new nuclear warning

[alarcojon]

Iran has threatened to press ahead with industrial-scale uranium enrichment if its nuclear work is referred to the UN Security Council.

Nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said Iran would "pursue its own path" if the US and its allies "want to use force".

He was speaking a day before the UN nuclear watchdog meets in Vienna.

Western powers believe Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons, for which enrichment is a key process, but Tehran says its plans are for civilian energy.

More...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4776132.stm

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Why won't they submit to our authority? nt.

[DemInDistress]

2. why should they submit to OUR AUTHORITY?

Who the hell are we? Earth's care-takers? when I see israel,pakistan and india give up their nukes maybe I'll come aboard this train wreck called IRAN. Until then I will never support this bush effort. also, its about the oil in Iraq and the coming Iranian Oil Bourse due March 26 2006..bet the war starts before then?

[megatherium]

5. I would bet against a war anytime soon.

Iran is years away from a bomb and we know it. If we were going to war within 3 weeks, I think there would be ominous signs already. (Is there anything going on that indicates imminent military action?)

[DemInDistress]

6. we both know this war wont be with troops..BUT

with missiles..I can't help but believe the bush crime family will allow Iran to open their own Oil Business on the scale of Brent Seas. I don't have all the facts Warren but should Iran go Euros and other oil producers switch from the Dollar, all financial hell will break loose in the U.S.

Thanks for the feedback. I have to run out now but should you reply I'll give you an answer..

[wookie294]

8. Iran can turn Bush's "air war" into a ground war

I think any aerial bombing by Bush will result in a response from Iran that will require larger numbers of U.S. ground troops. The insurgency in Iraq will grow worse as well. Both Iran and the United States will lose the war.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. Oh I disagree with that proposition.

I think a war sometime soon is just what our rulers need. They sure as heck need to get something going or they are going to have a major problem in november that even their vote scamming isn't going to fix.

[Warren Stupidity]

10. I meant that to be read as if a certain south park character

were speaking the line. I gave up emoticons for lent, trusting the better judgement of our DU readers to discern the actual meaning.

[Wise Doubter]

3. !!!!!

[Warren Stupidity]

11. (whew) somebody got it.

I thought for a moment that there were no SP watchers here.

Thanks.

[VegasWolf]

4. Because they don't have to? Iran is no weak Iraq! nt

[alarcojon]

7. Ummmmmm

I'm pretty sure Warren was being facetious.

[DarbyUSMC]

9. How is it people don't pick up on that? Maybe it is the written word

lacking the tone of "facetiousness", eh? I've begun to think that many disputes on forums escalate for this reason.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. I used to use the stupid smileys

But they are stupid. The written language got along quite well without emoticons for the last few thousand years. People have been able to derive meaning from context. The proposition that Iran should simply obey is so absurd, so insulting to the Iranian people, that putting it out there as the obvious subtext of our current shennanigans, the unstated dialog that is going on between the Neocon Imperialists and the few remaining independent nations is useful, even if I got a bit scorched in the process.

[geomon666]

14. In the dummortal's words, "Bring em on"

They know we don't have the resources to invade. They just gave Bush the finger. Next they'll show him where to put it.

[Doctor_J]

15. Shit. They can get bombs from Pooty-poot

:scared:

[David__77]

16. Here's the truth...

If Iran's president stood up and said, "Fuck you Bush. Fuck you Blair. Fuck you Merkel. Fuck all of you motherfucker imperialists. We will assert the same sovereign rights your countries enjoy. Your concern for 'human rights' is false, as shown by the crimes against Iraq and other poor countries. Your concern for 'disarmament' is only to maintain your monopoly on violence in the world. Iran will not make the same mistake the Ba'athists made--we will not submit. We are speaking on behalf of the people of the world, who are sickened by the crimes of imperialism."

If he did this, despite the fact that he is a clerico-fascist, despite the fact that the Iranian regime is truly backward and oppressive, the Iranian president would become the new hero to the people of Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

[alarcojon]

18. That would be great

but I think Chavez, if anyone, would be the world leader to say something approaching that.

[goforit]

17. Duck and cover folks.

[VegasWolf]

19. Hell, a weak Bush couldn't even stop them from running their pipeline

into Pakistan! Bush has turned America into a weak, debt-ridden nation.

[TheBaldyMan]

20. Dr Larijani gave an interview to Channel 4 news in UK

in an exclusive interview he gave his view of Mr. Boltons comments at the UN considering them to be ill-judged and badly informed. He also stressed that Iran would prefer to remain within the NPT and Iran's security were better served by non-nuclear means in the near east.

It was a pretty impressive interview and he gave as good as he got, I'd like to see how Rummy would handle an interview like that.

For those who have Win2k or WinXP with MediaPlayer9+ and a broadband connection you can view the interview here

This is part of Channel 4 News coverage this week that has extensive coverage from Iran. Details can be obtained from their website: Channel 4 Iranian Special Reports

[lovuian]

21. This man is standing on huge oilfields and wants to make nukes

they ar not going to let that happen... so all this guy has is threats to keep them at bay...