Iran Asks France to Oversee Enrichment (1 Viewer)

[jujuman13]

Link:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/03/D8KHAJ4O0.html

Interesting.

 

[easyt65]

Surprise, surprise. :roll:

France was taking bribes from Hussein to vote against military action in the U.N. Security Council before we went in. I wonder how much they charge for looking the other way while a terrorist-supporting nation continues making nukes?

 

[akyron]

No surprise. France has been selling arabs this technology for years.

Raid on Reactor.

Whats funny is Iran attempted and failed to destroy this reactor in Iraq before Israel sent in a strike team. What hypocrites.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Who would have thunk it. Good thing that picked a nice impartial country to do the job. Not some bribe taking, resolution breaking, terrorist supporting nation...........................O wait .... They did!!!! Sorry forgot they said france

 

[Volker]

This sounds like a good idea to me. In the end, both parties get what they want, Iran gets enrichment on his own soil and those who are concerned have French engineers to monitor the production, if they feel the need to do so.

 

[Tashah]

It's not kosher from an Israei viewpoint. France has vested interests (technology/financial) in Iran's nuclear industry.

France can't even properly monitor the Lebanon/Syria border. How the hell would it monitor a country four times the size of Iraq? The IAEA is the proper and designated international agency to monitor Iran's nuclear programs.

 

[Volker]

The IAEA can not make unannounced visits at this time, French engineers would be there whenever they like. If where would be sanctions, possibly Iran would leave non-proliferation treaty and then the IAEA can do nothing anymore. A common facility did not have this disavantage, as long as the Frenchies care about not giving all power and knowledge away.

 

[easyt65]

This sounds like a good idea to me. In the end, both parties get what they want, Iran gets enrichment on his own soil and those who are concerned have French engineers to monitor the production, if they feel the need to do so.

:shock: Maybe you missed the part about:

France was taking bribes from Hussein to vote against military action in the U.N. Security Council before we went in. I wonder how much they charge for looking the other way while a terrorist-supporting nation continues making nukes?

France has proven it can NOT be trusted with such a critical task!

 

[Tashah]

The IAEA can not make unannounced visits at this time, French engineers would be there whenever they like. If where would be sanctions, possibly Iran would leave non-proliferation treaty and then the IAEA can do nothing anymore. A common facility did not have this disavantage, as long as the Frenchies care about not giving all power and knowledge away.

Let me frame this unambiguously. France and Iran both fail the smell test.

 

[Deegan]

It is imperative that we have a nutreal, unbiased group to monitor this, France hardly fits the bill, the IAEA is the only logical choice.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Let me frame this unambiguously. France and Iran both fail the smell test.

Was France not our biggest ally in Afghanistan? I think they they were, and, as much as I don't really care for the French at times, had we listened to them, we would have never went into Iraq and as a result, been much better off today.

If we don't open some type of diplomatic channel up with Iran, then I don't see any other options out there. Some on here seem to think that war in the answer, but unless we want 12 dollar a gallon gas, and the resulting world wide economic collapse, then it would seem that diplomacy, the old carrot and stick approach is the only option at our disposal.

 

[Volker]

:shock: Maybe you missed the part about:

France was taking bribes from Hussein to vote against military action in the U.N. Security Council before we went in.

They voted against it, because starting a war against Iraq was not justified by any means.

 

[PeteEU]

They voted against it, because starting a war against Iraq was not justified by any means.

There was never a vote as the US and UK knew that 3 members with veto power would veto any action

France was taking bribes from Hussein to vote against military action in the U.N. Security Council before we went in.

And of course you can prove this? And why not go after China and Russia also, especially when Russia had far larger legal business dealings with Saddam than anyone else. Or are you just following some neo con pro Isreali talking points from 2003?

 

[Volker]

Let me frame this unambiguously. France and Iran both fail the smell test.

Yes, sure, why work with arguments, when you can make condescending statements about countries you don't like :roll:

 

[Volker]

There was never a vote as the US and UK knew that 3 members with veto power would veto any action

Yes, this is true, voted against is not the right term, maybe opposed it would be better.

 

[Volker]

And of course you can prove this? And why not go after China and Russia also, especially when Russia had far larger legal business dealings with Saddam than anyone else. Or are you just following some neo con pro Isreali talking points from 2003?

On a side note: There was no majority in Israel to support the war against Iraq.

Israel
Israeli public opinion is not convinced that a war with Iraq is needed. A 13 February Haaretz Newspaper poll shows that only 46% of Israelis support waging war against Iraq without a second U.N. resolution, and 43% oppose such an action. Of those 43% of the Israelis who oppose unilateral action, 20% oppose a U.S. attack against Iraq under any circumstances.

http://www.glocom.org/special_topics/social_trends/20030224_trends_s28/index.html

Here is a poll about the opinion among Jewish people in the US.

The American Jewish Committee's annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion, released Wednesday, found that 70 percent of U.S. Jews disapprove of the Iraq war, with 28 percent backing it. Sixty percent of respondents said they did not support America's handling of the war on terror, while 36 percent approve.

http://www.cjp.org/content_display.html?ArticleID=169151

 

[easyt65]

They voted against it, because starting a war against Iraq was not justified by any means.

No, it has been proven that France was taking BRIBES from Ireaq to vote 'No' on any action. they may have felt that wayy as well, but it is kinda hard to convince anyone of that when you are caught taking bribes to vote 'No'!

France also had 'advisors' on the ground in Iraq during the early days of the war, advising them on "proper tactics that might be beneficial in fighting someone like, Ummm, the U.S.", for example. :roll:

President Jacques Chirac - the President of France - was one of the major benefiiaries of the oil-for-food scandal.

France has sold weapons to the Islamic Regemists in Africa responsible for the on-going genocide. If it makes you feel any better, I will put it this way: Large amounts of French weapons have found their way into the hands of the Islamic Extremists who have committed the genoicde in Africa.

France is the LAST country...OK, Syria and Iran would have that distinction - near the bottom of the list of people/nations I would trust for this job!

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1167592004
Memos from Iraqi intelligence officials, recovered by American and British inspectors, show the dictator was told as early as May 2002 that France - having been granted oil contracts - would veto any American plans for war.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

No, it has been proven that France was taking BRIBES from Ireaq to vote 'No' on any action. they may have felt that wayy as well, but it is kinda hard to convince anyone of that when you are caught taking bribes to vote 'No'!

France also had 'advisors' on the ground in Iraq during the early days of the war, advising them on "proper tactics that might be beneficial in fighting someone like, Ummm, the U.S.", for example. :roll:

President Jacques Chirac - the President of France - was one of the major benefiiaries of the oil-for-food scandal.

France has sold weapons to the Islamic Regemists in Africa responsible for the on-going genocide. If it makes you feel any better, I will put it this way: Large amounts of French weapons have found their way into the hands of the Islamic Extremists who have committed the genoicde in Africa.

France is the LAST country...OK, Syria and Iran would have that distinction - near the bottom of the list of people/nations I would trust for this job!

Just for the sake of argument. How many murderous dictators have we armed and supported over the last 50 years or so? I am not big on the French, but I would say if you tallied up that number, its higher than the number of dictators they supported.

 

[easyt65]

Just for the sake of argument. How many murderous dictators have we armed and supported over the last 50 years or so? I am not big on the French, but I would say if you tallied up that number, its higher than the number of dictators they supported.

WHAT does anything you just said have to do with the reasons I just stated proving France can NOT be trusted with this job?!

 

[Gardener]

Yes, sure, why work with arguments, when you can make condescending statements about countries you don't like :roll:

Well, since you have already made it patently clear that you support the Mullahs and their oppression of women, gay people and anybody who is not a fundamentalist nazi, there is little doubt as to who you are supporting here.

 

[Volker]

No, it has been proven that France was taking BRIBES from Ireaq to vote 'No' on any action. they may have felt that wayy as well, but it is kinda hard to convince anyone of that when you are caught taking bribes to vote 'No'!

France also had 'advisors' on the ground in Iraq during the early days of the war, advising them on "proper tactics that might be beneficial in fighting someone like, Ummm, the U.S.", for example. :roll:

President Jacques Chirac - the President of France - was one of the major benefiiaries of the oil-for-food scandal.

Mr. Chirac will leave office in spring 2007, I guess.

France is the LAST country...OK, Syria and Iran would have that distinction - near the bottom of the list of people/nations I would trust for this job!

The Frenchies would be additional to the IAEO inspectors, they would not replace them, the way I understand it.

 

[MSgt]

Was France not our biggest ally in Afghanistan? I think they they were, and, as much as I don't really care for the French at times, had we listened to them, we would have never went into Iraq and as a result, been much better off today.

If we don't open some type of diplomatic channel up with Iran, then I don't see any other options out there. Some on here seem to think that war in the answer, but unless we want 12 dollar a gallon gas, and the resulting world wide economic collapse, then it would seem that diplomacy, the old carrot and stick approach is the only option at our disposal.

So...like the rest of the Global Left, you wordlessly agree to let the rest of the world rot for our oil? Isn't that what got us into this mess in the first place? Placating to dictators, religious fundamentalists, and "stability?" I thought Democrats and LIberals were all about the brown and black man?

The French and the rest of Old Europe very much agree with dictators and the "stability" they can provide. It is their legacy that we filthed ourselves with briefly during the Cold War. France had nothing but their interests in mind when they "warned us" against Iraq. Their "support" for Afghanistan, which came after Americans did the dirty work, involved the bare minimum and public voice. Don't give them too much credit. They may have well have given nothing, because nothing is what they are doing.

The Global Left insist upon "deplomacy" despite the attempts made by the EU, UN, and America. Iran laughed at the UN as it watched it's useless ultimatum pass right on by while China and Russia patted them on the back. And now they will rush to defend Iran's defiance towards the west by supporting a French watchful eye.

Iran's no fool. They know exactly who to turn to and how to split up the western world. Like terrorist organizations and other terrorist supporting nations, they will simply use our weakness and parade around "victories" to their masses.

 

[easyt65]

Mr. Chirac will leave office in spring 2007, I guess.

You you agree he is a criminal but state we don't have to worry about him because he is leaving?!

The Frenchies would be additional to the IAEO inspectors, they would not replace them, the way I understand it.

If France is only a bit player in the organization/group overseeing such enrichment activities, and based strongly/dependently on WHO/what OTHER countries make up the organization/body providing the supervision, then i might not have a problem with it.....but if we are talking about allowing the French ALONE to oversee this endeavor, FORGET IT!

 

[Volker]

You you agree he is a criminal but state we don't have to worry about him because he is leaving?!

I don't know about him being criminal, there is no legal action running against him I know of.

If France is only a bit player in the organization/group overseeing such enrichment activities, and based strongly/dependently on WHO/what OTHER countries make up the organization/body providing the supervision, then i might not have a problem with it.....but if we are talking about allowing the French ALONE to oversee this endeavor, FORGET IT!

As long as Iran is a member of non-proliferation treaty, I don't see how IAEO should change inspection policy.

 

[MSgt]

Just for the sake of argument. How many murderous dictators have we armed and supported over the last 50 years or so?

This is a European (French, German, etc.) legacy we cast off by taking out one of our responsibilities - Saddam Hussein.

Very few. Count them. Off hand, I can think of about 10 and the "House of Saud." Of course, depending on who you ask, this number will range from 5 to 50. Hell, some accuse us of supporting Hitler. The majority of dictators we are accused of supporting is nothing more than our government doing business with an existing government. Those that accuse us of supporting dictators are the same ones that accuse us for taking one out. Those that accuse us of involving ourselves in other governments accuse us for not getting involved in others. These individuals will never approve of anything America does and they are wonderfully happy blaming us for everything and accepting that most people, who know no better, will spread the propaganda.

Of course, our "support" of Hussein is like the French "support" of Iran today. It's Funny how so many can bash America and parade around the typical apologetics as prescribed to us by our "allies" and enemies abroad, while dismissing what is really going on with those foreign accusers.

I'm sure you are very aware of who is the number one exporter and supplier of weaponry to the third world. It is more common knowledge that our enemies and accusers like to dabble in. I bet you haven't a clue who was at the top of the list at number three as late as 2003.

I am not big on the French, but I would say if you tallied up that number, its higher than the number of dictators they supported.

You would be wrong. You are attempting to use a brief period in our history and comparing it to the entire history of France. Their history is rich with colonization, where the local thug received benefits for his control. Of course, there's also the historical internal dicatorship desguised as "royalty."
Even today, we can see the "support" of French troops in western Africa to protect their vested interests - despite the African governments lack of representation by their people.

It simply amazes me how all governments conduct business with other nations governments, yet only America gets the stigma of "supporting" dictators, despite our "allies" efforts to perfect such things. "Support" is a word that is very loosely passed around these days. If America bought a thimble, then they support the tyranny within.

And let's not even discuss who perfected genocide. You guessed it. The same ones who now have the nerve to pass out bad grades to America over the unfortunate civilian deaths in Iraq by our military and the overwhelming number of murdered civilians by their own people. Notice, most haven't a thing to say about the civillians that have died in Afghanistan. Yeah...they really care about those poor victims of America.

Iran knows exactly what they will get from French involvement.