Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
joc

Iran Rejects U.S.Talks

83 posts in this topic

Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei rejects U.S. offer of talks

Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected Thursday a U.S. offer to negotiate one-on-one on Tehran’s disputed nuclear program so long as Washington continues to impose sanctions on Iran.

“You (Americans) want to negotiate when you are pointing the gun at Iran. The Iranian nation will not be intimidated by such actions,” Khamenei told air force commanders, according to excerpts of his speech posted on his website.

“Some rejoice at the offer of negotiations ... (but) negotiations will not solve anything,” he said.

LINK

Thanks again Obama...for more egg on America's face!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone surprised by this?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't he shut up and actually do something useful in his life? like fair religion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

~Give sanctions more time~

That's what works, right?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't he shut up and actually do something useful in his life? like fair religion?

In his country they see it as fair. Thats fine by me, its when they want their "fair religion" in other countries to be accepted that when the problems starts.

Suppose thats the case throughout history with most religions.

Edited by freetoroam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, i suppose if they did meet face to face, they might have to reveal that the Dominant 313 is, so far at least, a plastic mock-up, and that their space (& potentially Missile) program is also, so far at least, a fraud. I suppose they're trying to maintain the bluff. Which, of coruse, was the mistake that Saddam made, but, as with everyone, Rulers and Leaders never seem to learn, do they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again Obama...for more egg on America's face!

I like how this, too, manages to be Obama's fault. How do you manage to work that out exactly? He hasn't bullied Iran enough, like George W. did with Iraq?

Edited by Lord Vetinari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how this, too, manages to be Obama's fault. How do you manage to work that out exactly? He hasn't bullied Iran enough, like George W. did with Iraq?

Give him time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran rejects the talks because they know they cannot/will not stop enrichment of uranium. With Oby's reelection they don't even have to play a game for time - they have all they need unless Bibi actually decides to give it a go unilaterally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how this, too, manages to be Obama's fault. How do you manage to work that out exactly? He hasn't bullied Iran enough, like George W. did with Iraq?

I'm not sure how the poster came to this uninformed opinion either. Obama knew Iran would refuse. This makes America look like they have the moral high ground on the matter, while making Iran look like they are unwilling to negotiate in any way.

It is a win for Obama from a political standpoint. Not sure how he think there is egg on America's face. It seems to me that this is more of the idiocy that comes with being either 'left' or 'right'. It blinds people.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran rejects the talks because they know they cannot/will not stop enrichment of uranium. With Oby's reelection they don't even have to play a game for time - they have all they need unless Bibi actually decides to give it a go unilaterally.

Bibi will start an arms race he can't afford to win. China and Russia have got Iran's back and the Israeli military is impotent. Let's stop pretending. How many more times are we going to kick the dead horse? How big of an idiot do you want the US to become in the world to even float the idea of invading Iran now, and once again doing Israel's dirty work for it?

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like always right on spot there. Yamato the man!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bibi will start an arms race he can't afford to win. China and Russia have got Iran's back and the Israeli military is impotent. Let's stop pretending. How many more times are we going to kick the dead horse? How big of an idiot do you want the US to become in the world to even float the idea of invading Iran now, and once again doing Israel's dirty work for it?

HUH? How in the world did you get any of those ideas from my post? Yam the US ISN'T going to invade Iran - I never said they would. IF a war comes to pass it will be more of a prolonged low intensity variety on Iran's part. Deadly, but not catastrophic. Israel is about to be watching an arms race regardless what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HUH? How in the world did you get any of those ideas from my post? Yam the US ISN'T going to invade Iran - I never said they would. IF a war comes to pass it will be more of a prolonged low intensity variety on Iran's part. Deadly, but not catastrophic. Israel is about to be watching an arms race regardless what they do.

OH REALLY NOW. I was under the assumption that you thought Iran nuking Israel was a real possibility. My bad. I shouldn't have read those hundreds of your posts.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OH REALLY NOW. I was under the assumption that you thought Iran nuking Israel was a real possibility. My bad. I shouldn't have read those hundreds of your posts.

Perhaps you'd care to repost ONE where I specifically said I think Iran is going to nuke Israel? I might have alluded to it as a possibility at some point but it hardly has been a theme with me so prove that one Yam. I have consistently said that the danger of an Iranian bomb is from proliferation and causing it's proxies to overstep, thus leading to regional war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you'd care to repost ONE where I specifically said I think Iran is going to nuke Israel? I might have alluded to it as a possibility at some point but it hardly has been a theme with me so prove that one Yam. I have consistently said that the danger of an Iranian bomb is from proliferation and causing it's proxies to overstep, thus leading to regional war.

When I commonly see your username displayed all the way down the list of threads ending every discussion in this ME forum, the 'and then' show certainly has a theme to it, Zionist Israel. We have both learned the hard way that inviting this kind of criticism of your content is frowned upon by the moderators here, so I'm not going to fall into that hole again when that's how I (we) got banned the last time. But finding evidence contrary to what you just claimed is easy, if anyone else cares to look, they'll find plenty there as a cursory search of your content quickly revealed.

And nobody need look any further than right here. You just did it again and don't even know it. What you just described is Iran nuking Israel but just going about it in a different way than some other slightly more conventional way you're presuming I just accept without speaking about. If it's delivered by proxy instead of by rocket, that doesn't count?

So now you think that Iran would build an atomic bomb and then give it away to someone else? What evidence do you have to support this? :huh:

Edited by Yamato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yamato & and then. You are both in my top 10 favorite posters to this forum, surely you guys can be more civil?

As to Iran rejecting the US "talks" (i think threats might be a better word), i can appreciate where they are coming from. Iran is in the position where they have annouced that they will not be selling oil in US$ anymore. Can anyone name another country that sold oil in Euros/gold that wasn't invaded by the US?

Now can anyone think of a nuclear armed country that the US has invaded?

I think a nuke will enable them to sell their comodities in any currancy they want. What this means is that IF Iran ever does make a bomb, it will be the biggest threat to our way of life, as economic collapse will be inevitable. The USA have moved from Gold Standard to Oil standard by being the sole trading currency for said comodity. As soon as oil is removed from being the standard we measure the value of US$ to, the US$ will become worthless.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yamato & and then. You are both in my top 10 favorite posters to this forum, surely you guys can be more civil?

As to Iran rejecting the US "talks" (i think threats might be a better word), i can appreciate where they are coming from. Iran is in the position where they have annouced that they will not be selling oil in US$ anymore. Can anyone name another country that sold oil in Euros/gold that wasn't invaded by the US?

Now can anyone think of a nuclear armed country that the US has invaded?

I think a nuke will enable them to sell their comodities in any currancy they want. What this means is that IF Iran ever does make a bomb, it will be the biggest threat to our way of life, as economic collapse will be inevitable. The USA have moved from Gold Standard to Oil standard by being the sole trading currency for said comodity. As soon as oil is removed from being the standard we measure the value of US$ to, the US$ will become worthless.

I think if you look at the tone of my posts you will see I have tried to be civil. As to your points on Iran and a nuke I think you may well be accurate in your assessment but the reasons to justify them having a weapon will, IMO, pale when they actually have it. You seem to assume that they simply want protection and I think they are after much more than just that. Time will tell, but one thing sure is that once they have a bomb the region becomes inherently more unstable and that works to no one's advantage. An Iranian bomb will embolden Hizballah and Syria and probably even Hamas. Israel is a formidable foe and if she gets pushed into a fight inadvertently as happened in 2006 in Lebanon, the results could be far different if they know Iran's leaders have a nuke to be sent their way via a ballistic missile - a certainty given time. It's a no win in the long run but it is about to become a reality. This has been my assertion long term - I have not regularly pushed the idea that Iran would ever try a first strike against Israel EXCEPT if a twelver actually got hold of launch capability. That is yet future.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you look at the tone of my posts you will see I have tried to be civil. As to your points on Iran and a nuke I think you may well be accurate in your assessment but the reasons to justify them having a weapon will, IMO, pale when they actually have it. You seem to assume that they simply want protection and I think they are after much more than just that. Time will tell, but one thing sure is that once they have a bomb the region becomes inherently more unstable and that works to no one's advantage. An Iranian bomb will embolden Hizballah and Syria and probably even Hamas. Israel is a formidable foe and if she gets pushed into a fight inadvertently as happened in 2006 in Lebanon, the results could be far different if they know Iran's leaders have a nuke to be sent their way via a ballistic missile - a certainty given time. It's a no win in the long run but it is about to become a reality. This has been my assertion long term - I have not regularly pushed the idea that Iran would ever try a first strike against Israel EXCEPT if a twelver actually got hold of launch capability. That is yet future.

Unless there was evidence that Iran would attack Israel after getting a nuke (THE assertion served ad nauseum by the Israeli regime for years now) then I don't know how anyone could justify Israel attacking Iran, over mere conjecture and political posturing.

I think we've both not only tried to be civil, I think we've been civil. Attacking positions is a part of debate; it's where it becomes personal that's uncivil and I don't see that happening here. Criticizing the content of our respective archives should be fair game. Frankly, I'd love to be challenged in that way, without being insulted personally of course.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times has the Prez of Iran asked for a one-on-one debate with the Prez of the USA? The answer is too many times to count. Personally I would pay for the pay-per-view to witness Obama vs. Ahmadinejad LIVE. I would love to hear how Obama would try to counter Ahmadinejad's arguments.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He talks to NK why would he need to talk to us. NK is more then willing to share its nuclear tech with them while we only want to sanction them. For good or bad thats the world we live in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there was evidence that Iran would attack Israel after getting a nuke (THE assertion served ad nauseum by the Israeli regime for years now) then I don't know how anyone could justify Israel attacking Iran, over mere conjecture and political posturing.

I think we've both not only tried to be civil, I think we've been civil. Attacking positions is a part of debate; it's where it becomes personal that's uncivil and I don't see that happening here. Criticizing the content of our respective archives should be fair game. Frankly, I'd love to be challenged in that way, without being insulted personally of course.

What Israel has postured over and what I have said are two different things. While it isn't impossible that a Twelver regime zealot might try a suicidal launch of a nuke against Israel in the future, I don't think that is the danger of an Iranian weapon. For the umpteenth time: The danger is that Iran's proxies will be emboldened to act rashly and cause the region to stumble into war by pushing Israel too far in some attack -JUST LIKE Lebanon 2006. Israel isn't going to nuke anyone in response to an attack that is less than an existential onslaught. They have fought 3 wars since they became a nuclear weapons state. But if a country like Syria began dropping salvo after salvo of chemical tipped scuds on their cities, well, all bets would be off then. Iran is drama at this point - SYRIA is danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times has the Prez of Iran asked for a one-on-one debate with the Prez of the USA? The answer is too many times to count. Personally I would pay for the pay-per-view to witness Obama vs. Ahmadinejad LIVE. I would love to hear how Obama would try to counter Ahmadinejad's arguments.

You expect any rational arguments from him? (Ahmadasapancake, that is.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You expect any rational arguments from him? (Ahmadasapancake, that is.)

Actually, he is one of the most rational, charismatic politicians I've heard speak. This doesn't dissuade me from disagreeing with his negative, conspiratorial, and at times outright anti-Semitic points of view, but, as far as debate goes, he can stand his ground.

You ever read transcripts from his UN speeches? He makes a lot of sense.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei rejects U.S. offer of talks

Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected Thursday a U.S. offer to negotiate one-on-one on Tehran’s disputed nuclear program so long as Washington continues to impose sanctions on Iran.

“You (Americans) want to negotiate when you are pointing the gun at Iran. The Iranian nation will not be intimidated by such actions,” Khamenei told air force commanders, according to excerpts of his speech posted on his website.

“Some rejoice at the offer of negotiations ... (but) negotiations will not solve anything,” he said.

LINK

Thanks again Obama...for more egg on America's face!

Mr Right-Wings translations -

US: You're evil, you stone women, you hang homosexuals, you would kill Jews and you're trying to get a nuclear weapon so you must be stopped.

Translation: We made a loss when Irans revolution kicked out our oil companies. They will give us back those oil rights or else!

Iran: Behold our supersonic torpedos, our submarines, our missle capabilities, our gun boats, our stealth fighters and our nuclear power program.

Translation: We must plant the seeds of doubt in US minds long enough for us to get a nuclear detterant. Otherwise they're going to invade and take our oil fields.

Britain: We must help America against these wicked evil people

Translation: Woof, woof yes master Obama. We'll obey if you let us have a slice of the cake.

Edited by Mr Right Wing
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.