[Volcana]

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...5375598305.htm

Cross-Atlantic rift reemerges over Iran
Wednesday 15 September 2004, 2:05 Makka Time, 23:05 GMT

A rift has surfaced between the United States and the European Union over how to deal with Iran over its suspected nuclear weapons programme.

Ignoring American suggestions, key members of the EU circulated their own recommendations to other delegates at a crucial meeting of the UN atomic energy on Tuesday.

The latest development contradicted earlier claims by some diplomats that the US and the Europeans were making progress in drafting a common language for an International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) resolution that would set a deadline for Iran to dispel fears it was trying to make nuclear arms.

But the latest draft circulated informally mirrored the one that France, Britain and Germany came up last week and was already dismissed by the US as not tough enough.

US demands
Washington demanded Iran grant the IAEA inspectors “complete, immediate and unrestricted access, and provide full information about past illegal nuclear activities.
It also insisted Tehran suspend immediately and fully uranium enrichment and related activities, and meet all agency demands to resolve all outstanding issues nurturing suspicions of possible weapons programme”.

More importantly, the US demanded the draft include a 31 October deadline for Iran to comply.

But the EU draft remained vague on both demands and a time frame, asking only that IAEA Director General Muhammad al-Baradai submit a comprehensive report before November for evaluation by the agency’s board of governors.

Al-Baradai shrugged off the idea of a deadline.

“We cannot just say there is a magic date for an end to the agency’s Iran probe,” he said. He also repeated that his investigation has not established whether Iran is trying to make nuclear arms, as US asserts.

“We haven’t seen any concrete proof that there is a weapons programme,” he said.

Revelations of the rift were expected to prove embarrassing to Washington.

The Americans “introduced amendments that were beyond what the market would bear,” said one senior western diplomat who follows the IAEA. “The European draft is right now going to have support”.

[Volcana]

Only this time, nobody in the world is taking our word for anything. We have, in a real way, 'sold our birthright for a mess of pottage'. We sold our credibility for the opportuntiy to invade Iraq. Now, if we actaually ARE facing real threats, who beleives the Bush administrations outside of its sycophants?

[rand]

oh volcana, on this one I think europe won't make too many difficulties, they just say no now to make a stand, but everyone knows Iran IS much more dangerou than Iraq was....
I'm on the Bush administration on this one (damn it feels strange to write this )

[Halardfan]

I actually think that if the US government has a similar plan for Iran as it does for Iraq, then it WILL have huge problems with Europe.

Britain's position is key here...Britain has been at the forefront of trying to engage with Iran, to normalise relations...its approach on this is very different to GW's.

I simply don't think the British government would or more importantly could, get away with following GW in the sheep-like fashion it did in Iraq.

Without British support, GW would be in big trouble.

[Volcana]

Originally Posted by rand

oh volcana, on this one I think europe won't make too many difficulties, they just say no now to make a stand, but everyone knows Iran IS much more dangerou than Iraq was....
I'm on the Bush administration on this one (damn it feels strange to write this )

'Everybody' knew Saddam Hussein had WMD. Only it turned out he didn't.
'Everybody' believed Colin Powell' when he came to the UN with incontrovertable proof of the threat Saddam Hussein posed. Only it turned out that what he said was untrue. And if he wasn't lying, he's a fool.

Look, all Bush had to say was, we soald Saddam Hussein 100 metric tons of VX gas, and he's only accounted for 20% of it. We sold Saddam Hussein 200 metric tons of nerve gas, and he's onl accounted for 30% of it. WE SOLD Saddam Hussein his WMD. We know he HAD it inthe early 90's. No ne disputes that. The isn't is whether the invasion was necessary then, or would 4-6 more weeks for UN weapons inspectors would have beenthe better course. Well, ten of thousands of dead later, it's quite clear that letting the weapons inspectors work would have beenthe better course. We'd still be the LEADER of the free world, not a rogue player that most of the powerful nations in the world want to steer clear of.

Sure Poland and Bulgaria and the Marshall Islands will back us if we invade Iran. The only way the Iranians can resist us is to get China in it on thier side. But given the amount of oil China is absorbing these days, an 'oil-for-weapons' program with Mid-East states is not at all unlikely. And China HAS both nukes, and delivery systems than can reach the US mainland.

And don't you think the Saudis notice how often American call for the overthrow of their state? Despite the overwhelming likelihood of a theocracy following the House of Saud? There was talk pre-invading Iraq of 'securing' the Saudi oil fields. Given the fact that we can't 'secure' the oil fileds in Iraq, how smart does THAT plan look.

To Americans, it seems insane that so many peple consider Bush a bigger threat than Osama bin Laden. But Bush has killed a lot more people. So far for reasons that turned out to be lies.

I think 'Everybody' is a damn sight more skeptical about us than they were two years ago. Think about how much world support we've lost. North Korea condemned the 9/11 attack, and offerred help. Libya condemned the 9/11 attack, and offerred help. So did Iran, and Yemen, and China. Virtuaslly every country but Iraq, actually. We invaded Afghanistan with literally the world marching at our back.

'Everybody' supported us totally. And we spit in their face AND lied to them. We gave up a LOT to invade Iraq. We HAD to find WMD there, because we acted against the (apparent) collective will of the peoples of the world. We acted in a away that was calculated to show 'Everybody' that our military might was so great, we could ignore 'Everybody's' express desires, and do whatever we pleased, no matter what the result.

No, I don't think 'Everybody' is going to be offerring us support anytime soon. In fact, if the UN acts militarily, I wouldn't be surprised to see them try to do it WITHOUT and US forces, just to avoid dealing with Bush/Rumsfeld axis.

[lakeway11]

"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other." ~ James Madison

"There was never a good war or a bad peace." ~ Benjamin Franklin

"Preparation for war is a constant stimulus to suspicion and ill will." ~ James Monroe

"While there are knaves and fools in the world, there will be wars in it." ~ John Jay

"The fiery and destructive passions of war reign in the human breast with much more powerful sway than the mild and beneficent sentiments of peace." ~ Alexander Hamilton

"My first wish is to see this plague of mankind, war, banished from the earth." ~ George Washington