Iran Is Defiant as U.S. Drafts Sanctions

[JLB]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/world/middleeast/01irancnd.html?hp&ex=1157083200&en=bdb439ee22f38322&ei=5094&partner=homepage

TEHRAN, Aug. 31 — Iran remained defiant today, ignoring a deadline set by the United Nations Security Council to suspend enrichment of uranium or face the threat of economic and political sanctions, which could choke its access to international banks and block the ability of its officials to travel abroad.

As the hours ticked down to midnight, Iran’s officials did not flatly reject the deadline. They did not have to. For months they have remained adamant about pursuing enrichment, transforming the act of enrichment into a matter of national pride. Iran’s leaders could hardly have reversed course without losing face and credibility at home, political analysts here said.

At the United Nations, the American ambassador, John Bolton, said: “Let’s be clear what the bottom-line conclusion is here today: Iran is defying the international community. Iran is not suspending its uranium enrichment activity, and from all that we can see in this report, it continues to pursue a nuclear weapons capability in violation of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.”

[JoetheDictator]

well come on JLB can't you see that they have to defend themselves against Jewish Nazi Fascists who seek to destroy all their neighboring states. These Israelis can't be trusted. They march and demand the destruction of all their neighbors. They seek to drive their neighbors into the sea. They do not recognize the right of their neighboring Islamic states to exist. They raise their children from birth to grow up and kill Arab women and children. They routinely attack schools, passenger transportation, hospitals, malls and the like. They export terrorism across the globe. .................................................. .................

Oh wait a minute, I'm sorry that's completely backwards.

[Green Lantern]

I don't know what we think sanctions will do. We had them under sanctions for most of the time since 1979. They already know how to get around them or live without various things.

[JoetheDictator]

I don't know what we think sanctions will do. We had them under sanctions for most of the time since 1979. They already know how to get around them or live without various things.

Yep, and their military gets all kinds of cool toys to play with.

[TheCrystalBall]

So when Bolton claims Iran is defying the interantional community, does he mean the "international community" or does he mean the U.S,the Uk, France, Germany but not including Russia, China, etc...

[Green Lantern]

Yep, and their military gets all kinds of cool toys to play with.

Here's a thought:

Instead of trying to prevent them from doing things they are allowed to do according to the treaty WE helped draw up, which makes us look imperialistic at best and racist at worst, why don't we give up trying to undue a law/treaty that is no longer viable and just come up with another form of deterent?

I would think that if we were smart, and I hope someone in our government is, that we would give up on this lost cause and it would cross our minds that we should move farther down the diplomatic/weapons-of-mass-destruction road and set up future roadblocks that would be effective in the future.

[Green Lantern]

So when Bolton claims Iran is defying the interantional community, does he mean the "international community" or does he mean the U.S,the Uk, France, Germany but not including Russia, China, etc...

Exempting China and Russia, France and Germany, yes. You just listed the international community as defined by the US diplomatic corp's diplomatic-speak-for-domestic-consumption.

[JoetheDictator]

Here's a thought:

Instead of trying to prevent them from doing things they are allowed to do according to the treaty WE helped draw up, which makes us look imperialistic at best and racist at worst, why don't we give up trying to undue a law/treaty that is no longer viable and just come up with another form of deterent?

I would think that if we were smart, and I hope someone in our government is, that we would give up on this lost cause and it would cross our minds that we should move farther down the diplomatic/weapons-of-mass-destruction road and set up future roadblocks that would be effective in the future.

bloody good idea sir.

[JoetheDictator]

Exempting China and Russia, France and Germany, yes. You just listed the international community as defined by the US diplomatic corp's diplomatic-speak-for-domestic-consumption.

Its also the way Shiva explains foreign policy to his pet monkey. :D

[35Pete]

Here's a thought:

Instead of trying to prevent them from doing things they are allowed to do according to the treaty WE helped draw up, which makes us look imperialistic at best and racist at worst, why don't we give up trying to undue a law/treaty that is no longer viable and just come up with another form of deterent?

I would think that if we were smart, and I hope someone in our government is, that we would give up on this lost cause and it would cross our minds that we should move farther down the diplomatic/weapons-of-mass-destruction road and set up future roadblocks that would be effective in the future.

How about we recognize that they are acting like a rogue state and treat them as such? The NNPT was installed for a reason. Do you really want to see it go by the wayside? I sure as hell don't. Hell, I wish we could get rid of our nukes. Who in their right mind would actually want to see one of those go off in a conflict? But the reality is that we cannot get rid of them. And the reality is that even with Bush we won't use them except in a defensive role.

[Green Lantern]

How about we recognize that they are acting like a rogue state and treat them as such? The NNPT was installed for a reason. Do you really want to see it go by the wayside? I sure as hell don't. Hell, I wish we could get rid of our nukes. Who in their right mind would actually want to see one of those go off in a conflict? But the reality is that we cannot get rid of them. And the reality is that even with Bush we won't use them except in a defensive role.

I'm sorry if my post seemed to advocate the dissolution of the NPT. That is not what I was going for. What I mean is this: the true control we (nuclear powers) had over the NPT was that the non-nuclear states were not technologically advanced to build their power plants without our help. That is not the case with Iran any longer. The second deterent was that someone would have to sell them fissile material. Iran can dig it out of its own mountains and has just successfully concentrated its uranium to 3%. They don't need to get it from anyone.

The old assumptions from the treaty; that someone would have to buy a reactor from one of the countries that will not sell it to them, and that someone would have to sell them fissile material; have been circumvented LEGALLY by Iran.

I don't say scrap the convention, I say leave the convention and, since they won this round fair and square, go on along our way and set up some more controls while we can still be proactive...we have eight years (is the conservative estimate I have heard) until they will be able to have enough material to build a nuclear bomb.

Bombing reactor sites and refining labs is a very narrow-minded way to go about controlling the situation and it will not work forever. We are going to just piss people off.

Years ago, when the treaty was drawn up, other countries were not scientifically advanced enough to develop their weapons on their own. Now many countries have scientists who can build bombs. They only need the uranium and refineries. We had better come up with new ways of keeping those people in check because I can tell you this, Iran is only the first of others to come who will want access to that power source and, maybe, a bomb.

[Green Lantern]

How about we recognize that they are acting like a rogue state and treat them as such? The NNPT was installed for a reason. Do you really want to see it go by the wayside? I sure as hell don't. Hell, I wish we could get rid of our nukes. Who in their right mind would actually want to see one of those go off in a conflict? But the reality is that we cannot get rid of them. And the reality is that even with Bush we won't use them except in a defensive role.

PS- What exactly is a rogue state?

You are not advocating that a country give up its right to self-determination and bow to the will of a supra-national organization like the UN, are you?