Jump to content

Bush warns Iran


Rob W
 Share

Recommended Posts

Bush warns Iran on nuclear plans

 

US President George W Bush says he still has not ruled out the option of using force against Iran, after it resumed work on its nuclear programme. He said he was working on a diplomatic solution, but was sceptical that one could be found.

 

The UN's atomic watchdog has called on Iran to halt nuclear fuel development.

 

Iran, which denies it is secretly trying to develop nuclear arms, restarted work at its uranium conversion plant at Isfahan on Monday.

 

"All options are on the table," said Mr Bush, when asked about the possible use of force during an interview for Israeli TV. "The use of force is the last option for any president. You know we have used force in the recent past to secure our country," he said.

 

 

NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE

Mined uranium ore is purified and reconstituted into solid form known as yellowcake

Yellowcake is converted into a gas by heating it to about 64C (147F)

Gas is fed through centrifuges, where its isotopes separate and process is repeated until uranium is enriched

Low-level enriched uranium is used for nuclear fuel

Highly enriched uranium can be used in nuclear weapons

 

In depth: Nuclear fuel cycle

Iran's press defiant

 

The BBC's Jonathan Beale in Washington says the president wants to send a clear warning to Tehran, although in reality the US already has its hands full in neighbouring Iraq.

 

'Cost them dearly'

 

The former Iranian President, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, has expressed surprise at Thursday's call by the UN nuclear agency, the IAEA, for Iran to suspend its nuclear activities.

 

The IAEA asked its chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, to report on Iran's compliance by 3 September. Speaking at Friday prayers in Tehran, Mr Rafsanjani said western opposition to Iran's decision to resume its nuclear programme would, as he put it, cost them dearly.

 

"Our people are not going to allow their nuclear rights to be seized," Mr Rafsanjani said. He said he was astonished that no country opposed the European Union-sponsored resolution, adopted by the IAEA, that urged Iran to stop any work on processing uranium for enrichment.

 

He emphasised that Iran's decision to resume its nuclear programme was irreversible, and said his country could not be treated like Iraq or Libya. The IAEA's 35-member governing body met in emergency session this week after Iran ended a nine-month suspension of work at Isfahan.

 

Iran insists it needs nuclear power as an alternative energy source, but Western nations fear it has plans to produce nuclear weapons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bush warns Iran on nuclear plans

 

US President George W Bush says he still has not ruled out the option of using force against Iran, after it resumed work on its nuclear programme.  He said he was working on a diplomatic solution, but was sceptical that one could be found.

 

The UN's atomic watchdog has called on Iran to halt nuclear fuel development.

 

Iran, which denies it is secretly trying to develop nuclear arms, restarted work at its uranium conversion plant at Isfahan on Monday.

 

"All options are on the table," said Mr Bush, when asked about the possible use of force during an interview for Israeli TV.  "The use of force is the last option for any president. You know we have used force in the recent past to secure our country," he said.

 

 

NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE

Mined uranium ore is purified and reconstituted into solid form known as yellowcake

Yellowcake is converted into a gas by heating it to about 64C (147F)

Gas is fed through centrifuges, where its isotopes separate and process is repeated until uranium is enriched

Low-level enriched uranium is used for nuclear fuel

Highly enriched uranium can be used in nuclear weapons

 

In depth: Nuclear fuel cycle

Iran's press defiant

 

The BBC's Jonathan Beale in Washington says the president wants to send a clear warning to Tehran, although in reality the US already has its hands full in neighbouring Iraq.

 

'Cost them dearly'

 

The former Iranian President, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, has expressed surprise at Thursday's call by the UN nuclear agency, the IAEA, for Iran to suspend its nuclear activities.

 

The IAEA asked its chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, to report on Iran's compliance by 3 September.  Speaking at Friday prayers in Tehran, Mr Rafsanjani said western opposition to Iran's decision to resume its nuclear programme would, as he put it, cost them dearly.

 

"Our people are not going to allow their nuclear rights to be seized," Mr Rafsanjani said. He said he was astonished that no country opposed the European Union-sponsored resolution, adopted by the IAEA, that urged Iran to stop any work on processing uranium for enrichment.

 

He emphasised that Iran's decision to resume its nuclear programme was irreversible, and said his country could not be treated like Iraq or Libya. The IAEA's 35-member governing body met in emergency session this week after Iran ended a nine-month suspension of work at Isfahan.

 

Iran insists it needs nuclear power as an alternative energy source, but Western nations fear it has plans to produce nuclear weapons.

11540[/snapback]

 

and if they get them, they will live in peace and harmony with their neighbours, especially Israel, and the rest of the world won't they

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine they look at their "peaceful neighbours" and see

 

Turkey - member of NATO - US bases

 

Kazakstan - US & Russian bases

 

Azerbaijan - US ally

 

Armenia - anti Moslem

 

Russia - anti moslem, H Bombs

 

China - H Bombs

 

Pakistan - A bombs

 

India - anti moslem A Bombs

 

Afghanistan - full of US & British troops

 

Iraq - a bloody mess full of US & British troops

 

Israel - anti moslem - A Bombs

 

 

If I lived in THAT neighberhood I'd want a big stick as well I think - just in case.................................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about America gets rid of its numerous nuclear weapons before preaching to everyone else to disarm.

11973[/snapback]

 

Nail on the head Ally without realising. The yanks [and others] have nuclear weapons but can be trusted not to just fire them indiscriminately...because they haven't.

 

I've met and worked with yanks, one or two can be a bit paranoid or hyper but basically they aren't going to use them unless they are fired at first.

 

Do you think some middle eastern countries, or organisations, would adopt such a stance ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're completely fecked anyway. If I was a bookie I'd give about 10-1 on us seeing out this century.

 

Different time I don't understand - humans have not developed significantly in a long time - just the toys have changed.

 

Different reason - that I'd like to discuss, I think we have different perceptions of why all this is happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I meant is what happened in 1945 .. presume this is what was meant ... is totally different to the world now.

 

That bomb in 1945 ended a 6 year long war. Whoever fires the first one now will start one.

 

Different reason ?? Where do you start .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Different reason ?? Where do you start .....

12071[/snapback]

 

Exactly, it's basically impossible to have these discussions on an internet forum. Like wallpapering your house through the letterbox - no wait that's something else.

 

What I really meant on the time issue is that the fact it's happened 60 years ago is insignificant.

 

Stopping wars/starting wars - some might say there's a world war going on right now. And any nation that drops a nuclear bomb on a city, any time, in any situation scares the shit out of me - that was really my point about how much I would trust the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about America gets rid of its numerous nuclear weapons before preaching to everyone else to disarm.

11973[/snapback]

 

Nail on the head Ally without realising. The yanks [and others] have nuclear weapons but can be trusted not to just fire them indiscriminately...because they haven't.

 

I've met and worked with yanks, one or two can be a bit paranoid or hyper but basically they aren't going to use them unless they are fired at first.

 

Do you think some middle eastern countries, or organisations, would adopt such a stance ?

11981[/snapback]

 

thats a good idea,measure a countries policies by those people you know from that country(in my experience......france is a slut,the US is ok till put with others from the same place,denmark is mental,india is an america wannabee,turkey is paranoid)

 

That bomb in 1945 ended a 6 year long war. Whoever fires the first one now will start one.

 

 

 

6years for some...4 years for others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats a good idea,measure a countries policies by those people you know from that country(in my experience......france is a slut,the US is ok till put with others from the same place,denmark is mental,india is an america wannabee,turkey is paranoid)

12221[/snapback]

Funny thing is that's how everyone seems to do it. When I say I've lived in England or I live in France etc. I sometimes get "Oh the French are so this" or "the English are so that" whenever you challenge the view it's invariably anecdotal evidence about some guy they met once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about America gets rid of its numerous nuclear weapons before preaching to everyone else to disarm.

11973[/snapback]

 

 

imo America should lose 30% of its weapons. Ask other countries to give up 50% of theirs. Then they get rid a further 30% as other countries to get rid of 25%, then get rid of 20%, ask other countries to get rid 15%. then america gets rid of 15%, asks other countries to lose all of theirs, then they lose the final 5%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is going to give them up - well not all of them - just in case someone cheats or you're back is up against the wall

 

But the Yanks are developing new weapons and the Brits still keep Aldermaston & Burghfield running..........................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about America gets rid of its numerous nuclear weapons before preaching to everyone else to disarm.

11973[/snapback]

 

Nail on the head Ally without realising. The yanks [and others] have nuclear weapons but can be trusted not to just fire them indiscriminately...because they haven't.

 

I've met and worked with yanks, one or two can be a bit paranoid or hyper but basically they aren't going to use them unless they are fired at first.

 

Do you think some middle eastern countries, or organisations, would adopt such a stance ?

11981[/snapback]

 

thats a good idea,measure a countries policies by those people you know from that country(in my experience......france is a slut,the US is ok till put with others from the same place,denmark is mental,india is an america wannabee,turkey is paranoid)

 

That bomb in 1945 ended a 6 year long war. Whoever fires the first one now will start one.

 

 

 

6years for some...4 years for others

12221[/snapback]

 

eh ?

 

I said

The yanks [and others] have nuclear weapons but can be trusted not to just fire them indiscriminately...because they haven't.

 

Then added

one or two can be a bit paranoid or hyper but basically they aren't going to use them unless they are fired at first.

 

Please explain, which of the above do you disagree with. Do you think they are all trigger happy, despite not using the nuclear weapons they have - FACT, or do you think I have met the only few who aren't - despite the others not using the nuclear weapons they have.

 

Sorry, I haven't a clue what you mean by

6years for some...  4 years for others
. You're not one of those who think if we lay down our arms in a gesture of goodwill , all the despots and terrorists of Al Queida etc are all going to say, "fair enough we'll drop ours too and join hands with the western brothers". The loony lefties said that about the Russians for decades while they continued marching on eastern europe....
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.