Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
iaapac

Bush says force last resort in Iran

294 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

iaapac

Bush: Force last resort on Iran

JERUSALEM (Reuters) -- U.S. President George W. Bush said on Israeli television he could consider using force as a last resort to press Iran to give up its nuclear program.

"All options are on the table," Bush, speaking at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, said in the interview broadcast on Saturday.

Asked if that included the use of force, Bush replied: "As I say, all options are on the table. The use of force is the last option for any president and you know, we've used force in the recent past to secure our country."

Iran angered the European Union and the United States by resuming uranium conversion at the Isfahan plant last Monday after rejecting an EU offer of political and economic incentives in return for giving up its nuclear program.

Tehran says it aims only to produce electricity and denies Western accusations it is seeking a nuclear bomb.

Bush made clear he still hoped for a diplomatic solution, noting that EU powers Britain, Germany and France had taken the lead in dealing with Iran.

Washington last week expressed a willingness to give negotiations on Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program more time before getting tougher with the country.

"In all these instances we want diplomacy to work and so we're working feverishly on the diplomatic route and we'll see if we're successful or not," Bush told state-owned Israel Channel One television.

Bush has also previously said that the United States has not ruled out the possibility of military strikes. But U.S. officials have played down media speculation earlier this year they were planning military action against Iran.

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said on Friday that negotiations were still possible with Iran on condition the Iranians suspend their nuclear activities.

The governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) unanimously called on Iran on Thursday to halt sensitive atomic work.

Douste-Blazy said the next step would be on September 3 when IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei reports on Iran's activities.

If Iran continues to defy global demands, another IAEA meeting will likely be held, where both Europe and Washington will push for a referral to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.

Copyright 2005 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Find this article at:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08...reut/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc

What would you prefer? A strategic strike against Iran's nuclear capabilities....or Iran with ICBMs armed with nuclear warheads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iaapac

Which, of course, is the exclusive right of the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc

In the history of the Nuclear Age...Two atomic weapons have been used against a population and those were the A-bombs America dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki which ended WWII in the Pacific.

Whom would you trust most with nuclear weapons? America or a country who sponsers international terrorism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bathory
Which, of course, is the exclusive right of the United States.

what an absurd statement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zephyr
A strategic strike against Iran's nuclear capabilities

This is of course easier said than done effectively as the nuclear capabilities of Iran are spread all over the place and the consequences of such an idiotic act completely unpredictable. What this is going to achieve is a terrible mess added to the mess that already exists, and all this just because some short-sighted warmongers happen to have a hard time holding themselves back. disgust.gif

Whom would you trust most with nuclear weapons? America or a country who sponsers international terrorism?

I don't trust America one bit with nukes, not anymore than I trust anybody else. angry.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pannkakskungen
In the history of the Nuclear Age...Two atomic weapons have been used against a population and those were the A-bombs America dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki which ended WWII in the Pacific.

Whom would you trust most with nuclear weapons?  America or a country who sponsers international terrorism?

789374[/snapback]

Well, the US used to sponsor terrorists, does that mean according to you that the US shouldnt have any nuclear weapons anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iaapac

The statement is not absurd. How is it possible to believe that in the course of 60 years nuclear experimentation would not spread to other nations. It has. Israel and India developed nuclear capabilities with no protest from the U.S. Iran says that it wants nuclear power to produce electricity. My God, why wouldn't it be easier to monitor the use of nuclear power than to ban it?

So when I say that this is an exclusive right of the U.S.? there is nothing absurd about it. In an age when the pollution produced as a biproduct of energy and is destroying our planet, is it intelligent to deny other nations alternative methods that produce no contamination?

If your argument will be that Iran and others are not to be trusted, I ask you to look at international polls and see what nation is least trusted in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
twpdyp

I noticed in the original title of the thread it said "Just like Iraq?"

How many years did Saddum thumb his nose at not only the United States but at the liberals holy shrine, The United Nations? More than 10 by my memory. How long does a nation get to disregard the orders of the U.N. Now the EU is on it, kind of like USA and North Korea correct. If the EU and the U.N. have a problem with Iran and its nuclear program let them have a taste of what it is like to try and reign in these terrorist supporting nations. Let's see how long before they actually make a move and go beyond mere sanctions. How long before there is French, German, etc. etc. troops landing in Iran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pannkakskungen

If I were to pick a country that I dont trust with nuclear weapons, Iran would not be my first choice, far from it, my first choice would be pakistan. Pakistan that supports terrorism, is highly un-democratic and nobody gives a rats ass that they have nuclear weapons, except India of course which is the main target of these weapons. Pakistan has also exported critical nuclear weapons plans and equipment, but did the US and other allies do anything about that, no, of course not. Did the pakistani government do anything about the man responsible for exporting this knowhow to countries like North Korea, no, not really, he was "forced" to make a public apology on national TV and, hold on to your seats, he was sent to house arrest, the horror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iaapac
If I were to pick a country that I dont trust with nuclear weapons, Iran would not be my first choice, far from it, my first choice would be pakistan. Pakistan that supports terrorism, is highly un-democratic and nobody gives a rats ass that they have nuclear weapons, except India of course which is the main target of these weapons. Pakistan has also exported critical nuclear weapons plans and equipment, but did the US and other allies do anything about that, no, of course not. Did the pakistani government do anything about the man responsible for exporting this knowhow to countries like North Korea, no, not really, he was "forced" to make a public apology on national TV and, hold on to your seats, he was sent to house arrest, the horror.

789685[/snapback]

Where was the invasion of Pakistan? Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf is consistently listed by Amnesty International as one of the worst dictators in the world having much higher rankings than Hussein ever achieved but this experimentation and actual development of an atomic bomb was condoed in silence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr_Strangelove

You know, on a certain level it really wouldn't bother me if Iran came out and said it had a nuclear weapon tomorrow. In some ways it would make our foreign policy a lot simpler. I would welcome them to the so-called 'nuclear club'.

Then I would tell them that the first time we had a hostile nuclear detonation anywhere they would be subject to the full weight of our nuclear arsenal. I think we sitll have enough inventory to reduce their country to a glowing slagheap.

Once again, welcome to the nuclear club!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mekorig

Strangly, i agree whit Dr_Strangelove. The funny part of the Nuclear Club is that everyone had his dagger in each other troath. You made a push, and all the other made a push, and finito for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zephyr
How long before there is French, German, etc. etc. troops landing in Iran?

We're not expecting them any time soon, in fact we're not expecting them at all; sorry! grin2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baku
Whom would you trust most with nuclear weapons?  America or a country who sponsers international terrorism?

789374[/snapback]

You should be carefull with what your saying, we are discussioning a thread here and you are pointing fingers already. I have never heard about something absurd like this. How the hell would you know Iran supports terrorist, and why cant it be the US who supports them. The way I (and loads of others) see it, the US has done more harm and raged more wars, taken more lives away then other country in the planet. So no I surely dont trust the US with nukes. And for the record to update you, Iran is not making Nuclaer weapons but for civilians. Since the US has put a trade embargo on Iran this is nessary for the Iran people.

And before you open your mounth again about something I suggest you rethink about it. You are talking without and arguments, facts, proofs, the only thing you do is pointing fingers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pannkakskungen
Where was the invasion of Pakistan? Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf is consistently listed by Amnesty International as one of the worst dictators in the world having much higher rankings than Hussein ever achieved but this experimentation and actual development of an atomic bomb was condoed in silence.

789690[/snapback]

I know, General brownpants is a nasty person, nasty I tell you.

Sanctions were raised against Pakistan at 2 times due to their nuclear programme, but these were lifted after 9/11 when brownpants told GWB that he would help capture his old allies the Al-Qaida.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr_Strangelove
Strangly, i agree whit Dr_Strangelove. The funny part of the Nuclear Club is that everyone had his dagger in each other troath. You made a push, and all the other made a push, and finito for everyone.

789855[/snapback]

Thank you for your statement Mekorig. Being a survivor of the days of 'Mutual Assured Destruction' and a paycheck drawing employee of the United State's military-industrial complex I always appreciate when somebody grasps some of the terrible beauty of the bomb.

Yes, it is both a terrible and wonderful thing to harness the power of the atom. I imagine that somewhere within the United States military officers are already figuring out targetting solutions and throw-weight thresholds for Iran. If they decide to play the nuclear game they will also need to consider the potential costs.

I doubt if we would even have to use ten percent of our available nuclear arsenal to reduce them to a irradiated wasteland.

grin2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
morpheas

-Post removed-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iaapac

This is exactly the mentality that is the fear of the rest of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr_Strangelove
I doubt if we would even have to use ten percent of our available nuclear arsenal to reduce them to a irradiated wasteland.

you say that without a care for the innocent people living there, dont you think even iran knows that, i get fed up with gun-ho attitudes like that.the arrogance.

790242[/snapback]

Glad I made your day. You are now grasping one of the wonderful things about entering the nuclear club. Nobody is innocent to nuclear planners; just collateral damage.

Come on Iran, build a bomb...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iaapac

Dr. Strangelove, I have to look at your profile to be sure that you're not really George Bush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
morpheas

-Post removed-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SnakeProphet

And he even has to look 3 times tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iaapac

I didn't believe it the first two times. HE IS GEORGE BUSH!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr_Strangelove
Dr. Strangelove, I have to look at your profile to be sure that you're not really George Bush.

790336[/snapback]

No, sorry, I could never support the man. I never liked his policy decisions around nuclear weapons.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.