Iran talks recess with no signs of progress
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
U.N. observers warn of Syria civil war after massacre
( 7 )
-
Obama on the defensive over spending, debt
( 18 )
-
Egypt's top candidates try to broaden support
( 1 )
-
Queen marks diamond jubilee riding wave of popularity
( 0 )
-
Thousands take part in 'Slut Walks' in Brazil
( 10 )
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
-
- 営業パーソン
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tochigi
- Salary: ¥240,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
23 Comments
Login to comment
0
sabiwabi
Iran is no where close to the being able to build such weapons and it has already been severely sanctioned. Israel, on the other hand, already built in secret a considerable nuclear arsenal, refuses to join the NPT or allow inspections, and instead of getting sanctions it is getting financial and military aid. Go figure.
And now they mention that Israel has not ruled out military action, as if that was an acceptable action.
0
skipthesong
Israel, on the other hand, already built in secret a considerable nuclear arsenal" According to a guy I met at the Sanno Hotel last week, that said arsenal is not in Israel, but in the US. So, if that is true, then they really don't have to join NPT and there is nothing there to inspect. Besides, where would they have the room there to build it there? And don't give me a smart ass answer.
0
sabiwabi
skip, are you suggesting Vanunu has spent about 20 years in solitary confinement for no reason?
Israel has been urged several times to sign the NPT and allow inspections. Israel has always refused, but not only do they not get sanctions, they continue to receive massive financial and military assistance.
Iran joined the NPT and allows inspections, and they are rewarded with strict sanctions due to the efforts of the same people who lied about Iraq's WMDs.
The hypocrisy is mind boggling.
0
thetruthhurts
My opinion is that Iran is a dangerous country. The reason I have this opinion is because the government of Iran considers that an citizen of a foreign country who lives in a foreign country and merely writes a fiction novel is reason enough for that person being put to death. I see this as very dangerous and I further see a country such as Iran having the technology to make nuclear weapons as dangerous. With this in mind, how is it that anyone can support such a country? How is it that anyone can be comfortable with such a country having access to technology that can be converted into nuclear weapons? They are willing to have someone killed for merely writing a piece of fiction. Sorry, I don't see how a country like this warrents the trust needed to be allowed to have access to nuclear techology that can be used to make nuclear weapons.
Again, this is a country that has had a hit out on a regular citizen of a foreign country living in a foreign country for merely writing a fictional novel. Why should this be overlooked? In my opinion it should absolutely not be.
0
jruaustralia
IF THERE'S ANYTHING that caught my attention so far, against letting Iran pursue its nuclear power goal... it's this one:
One step closer to Allahs bomb. There is nobody who is going to stop the mullah regime now.
At least it's less BS, if not politically incorrect to some.
0
thetruthhurts
The fact that Iran is willing to kill innocent foreign citizens in other countries merely because they wrote a book is certainly to be considered BS. However, bringing it up when said country wants technology that can be converted to nuclear weapons is certainly not. You seem to not understand the different between in country 'censorship' and Iran's deciding that free citizens of other countries are not allowed to exercise their freedoms in their own countries. You further seem not to care that Iran has had this hit out for more than twenty years or that people have died as a result of it.
Even without nuclear weapons, Iran felt free to call out this hit. I can't see anyone who is reasonable not understanding concerns related to Iran possesses the potential to create nuclear weapons
Whether you agree or not, my opinion is quite clear on the matter. Your quoting other posters with content unrelated to mine seemingly in response to me is quite less so.
0
jruaustralia
It's based on simple facts that Iran's opposition is no different to the subject of nuclear power. These people might promise regime change, minor foreign and internal policy shifts (and rub shoulders with int'l celebrities, like the Nobel laureate Shirin EBADI teaming up with Giorgio ARMANI) but they too won't back down over this country's nuclear power ambition. And the simple fact remains that the opposition, too, will pursue nuclear power as much as Ahmadinejad.
BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING that caught my attention so far, against letting Iran pursue its nuclear power goal... it's this one:
One step closer to Allahs bomb. There is nobody who is going to stop the mullah regime now.
At least it's less BS, if not politically incorrect to some.
0
thetruthhurts
I simply do not understand your position. Probably this is true because you are not making much sense in response to my posts. Who said anything about being against nuclear power in general? Certainly I have not. I am being quite clear that the present country of Iran should not have access to technology that can be converted into nuclear weapons. Do you have any information that the opposition to the present government in Iran would also favor calling for hits on innocent foreign citizens living in other countries merely for their thoughts? If not, then you really are not making any argument against what I have been saying. In addition, you continuing to copy and paste that quote is quite meaningless in this discussion.
There is nothing BS about my position. Pasting the same silliness? That is an entirely different matter.
0
jruaustralia
Balderdash! And the 1988 fatwa on Salman RUSHDIE, obviously is relevant to the issue of nuclear proliferation? Imagine then the six-power party discussing back-and-forth because of..... the fatwa?!
As to my position on the issue, it's not limited to two threads. You're more than welcome to peruse what I previously said, on recent sanctions, on Bashr, etc. I don't need to repeat myself.
And till you can contribute something on the issue (beside the almighty fatwa on RUSHDIE), I won't answer any further.
Moderator: All readers back on topic please and stop sniping at each other.
0
thetruthhurts
The topic is Iran and the possibility of it getting its hands on nuclear weapons. When considering whether a country, which does not have nuclear weapons already, should have them, it is certainly reasonable to look at the government of said government and their attitudes and actions. It is my opinion that ordering someone killed merely because they wrote a book is a reason to not want them to have access to nuclear weapons. I would feel the same about a crazy person having access to weapons: I would not want it to happen.
Do you see the problems that exist with regard to North Korea? Do you think they would be nearly as difficult if NK did not have access to nuclear weapons? I feel the same is true of Iran and, as long as JT will allow me to, I will voice my opposition to the present country of Iran having access to technology that can be converted to nuclear weapons. I am not sure why you are taking this personally as it is only my opinion. You are free to have whatever opinion you wish. I just did not understand what your opinion had to do with me or mine.
0
thetruthhurts
BTW, in what I would hope would be a civilized world, yes I would hope this would be a central topic. I find it reasonable that it would be and unreasonable that it is pushed under the carpet and pretended to not exist. A country with a desire to kill others for their ideas should not have access to nuclear weapons potential. This is my opinion.
0
jruaustralia
The topic is Iran, the topic is nuclear proliferation, the topic is not Salman RUSHDIE and the fatwa.
BUT AGAIN IF THERE'S ANYTHING that caught my attention so far, against letting Iran pursue its nuclear power goal... it's this one:
One step closer to Allahs bomb. There is nobody who is going to stop the mullah regime now.
Question to you is, why wouldn't you second the above claim?!
0
skipthesong
Never thought the left would be in so much support of nukes... even energy.
0
thetruthhurts
The topic is Iran, the topic is Iran getting nuclear power and the potential to convert that technology to weapons. The mindset of Iran in this regard is quite important. This past year, the Iranian government reaffirmed that the hit was still out. Thus, the dangerous mindset is still there. I don't think a country with such a mindset should be allowed access to such technology. That is the subject of this debate.
You asked me to second the quote? Sorry, I will not. It is not what I am saying. This has nothing to do with Islam or Allah to me. There are plenty of countries that have Islam as their center and they have not issued any contracts for murder on average citizens for writing fictional novels that I know of. That honor goes to Iran and the Iranian government. You do not seem to think this is a dangerous thing. Fine. I do however. BTW, why has the above quote caught your attention so much?
0
thetruthhurts
What are you two the same person? Anyway, people have died as a result of the hit put out by Iran and there have been assassination attempts. So, people did 'go after the guy' at the behest of Iran. Your now compare Iran to Israel does not change this fact. This Iranian government that is presently in power just this year reaffirmed their commitment to the hit against an innocent writer who lives in and is a citizen of another country and who has had assassination attempts on his life because of the hit order put out and maintained by Iran. My opinion is that Iran is a dangerous country. The reason I have this opinion is because the government of Iran considers merely writing a fiction novel as reason for being put to death. I see this as very dangerous and I further see a country such as Iran having the technology to make nuclear weapons as dangerous. I think this opinion, whether you agree or not is quite clear. You still neglect to comment on it. I have no idea why you cannot do so. I further find it curious because since I have bumped into you I have noticed you commenting about a supposed lack of freedom to say what you wish. Do you deny that freedom to others?
There is plenty of evidence, backed up by the Iranian government, that they are willing to kill people for writing books they don't like. They are willing to kill people who are not citizens of Iran, who have nothing to do with Iran and who do not live in Iran. Iran admits this freely and has done so this year, as they do every year. How you can defend this is quite amazing to me.
Moderator: Readers, Israel is not relevant to this discussion.
0
thetruthhurts
Again, I think Iran is a very dangerous country. Once a country gets its hands on nuclear weapons, it is pretty much impossible to take them away.
0
jruaustralia
Ho Ho Ho! Why not?! After all you're the one who tried to hijack this thread with the 1988 fatwa on Salman RUSHDIE (and fatwa for what? for the blasphemous novel Satanic Verses).
BUT FOR SOME ODD reason the claim quoted:
One step closer to Allahs bomb. There is nobody who is going to stop the mullah regime now.
.... Is somehow inappropriate. (Talk about dodging the heart of the issue, you i____e)
But here's a thing for you. The Iranian Government--whether it's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or the main Opposition--is not the highest political office of the land. Any respected newspapers in the Free World would point that the religious hierarchy controls the game in Iran. The mullahs of Tehran!
And either you drop political correctness or lessen the b____t.
0
thetruthhurts
What I have written about the Iranian government are facts. They are not distortions, misunderstandings or lies created by the media. I don't trust a country with such a government to have assess to nuclear technology that can be converted to weapons.
0
thetruthhurts
The religious hierarchy are the Iranian government. However, I am not talking about Allah or some indescript mullahs. I am talking about the Iranian goverment. I don't trust them to have access to nuclear technology. This is not because of their religion, it is because of their actions. Neither do a lot of other countries.
0
sabiwabi
There is no evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, and they are allowing inspections and have joined the NPT. As an NPT member, not only do they have the right a nuclear energy program, other NPT members have an obligation to help Iran. It seems they bringing up these rights and obligations in the talks.
The "action" you brought up is quite insignificant. Indeed, considering their actions during the past centuries until today, if I had to choose one nation to have nuclear weapons, it would be Iran. I would trust them more than most, if not all, other nations.
0
thetruthhurts
The present state of Iran has not been around for centuries. So there is no need to consider any actions on the part of Iran before the revolution that brought about the present government. I am referring to the present government's actions. You don't consider them significant? Fine. I do and so do lots of nations and the people in them. Even other nations in the Middle East are find Iran's actions frightening. What is to be trusted about a government that threatens others just because they become 'offended'. Next, Iran will be threatening death because of a costume or something.
Iran is unwilling to cooperate and help win the trust of the world. Iran is unwilling to take back the threats of death that help make Iran untrustworthy. Why should such a country be allowed to have access to nuclear technology? I understand the world's fears about Iran. Any free thinking person would.
0
sabiwabi
No, only some of their leaders, AND that's only if you believe wikireaks is legit; I don't.
They have done more than what the NPT requires them to.
0
thetruthhurts
I think it is fair to say many nations' leaders and citizens are afraid of Iran. I have not met the whole world, so I will not say all. I don't need wikileaks for that. My eyes and ears suit just fine for the task. However, we disagree on this point. Nothing wrong with that.
BTW, I am not quite sure it is true that they have done 'more than the NPT requires them to do'. In checking to respond to you, I found that Iran has been found in violation of NPT safeguards in the past according the IAEA. Perhaps you do not believe them as well?
Anyway, this thread has wound down. Take care.
Back to top