• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Iran Sacking Moderate Ambassadors


Sep 23, 2005
Reaction score
Political Leaning
If US troops were not in Iraq, would the Bush Adminstration have better options when dealing with Iran?

Iran Removing 40 Ambassadors From Posts By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 36 minutes ago

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's hard-line government said Wednesday it was removing 40 ambassadors and senior diplomats, including supporters of warmer ties with the West, from their posts in a shake-up that comes as the Islamic republic takes a more confrontational international stance.

But IRNA said they included the ambassador to London, Mohammad Hossein Adeli, one of Iran's top diplomats and a leading member of the pragmatic foreign policy wing that supports contacts with Europe.

The moves give the new government of ultraconservative President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the chance to purge pro-reform figures brought in by his predecessor, moderate Mohammad Khatami, and install its own supporters.

Ahmadinejad has taken a tougher line on a number of issues, particularly negotiations with Britain, France and Germany over Iran's controversial nuclear program. Hard-liners have criticized Khatami's government for agreeing to freeze much of the country's atomic activities during the talks, and Ahmadinejad already has replaced much of the negotiating team with hard-liners.

The new president, elected in June, also generated a storm of international criticism last week when he called for Israel's eradication, saying it should be "wiped off the map."

Parchin has been linked by the United States and other nations to alleged experiments linked to nuclear arms. The IAEA had for months been trying to follow up on a visit in January for further checks of buildings and areas within the sprawling military complex as it looks for traces of radioactivity.

Iran also has handed over documents and granted interviews with several senior officials believed linked to black market purchases of uranium enrichment technology, the diplomats said.

TimmyBoy said:
If US troops were not in Iraq, would the Bush Adminstration have better options when dealing with Iran?

I'm a little confused by the question. The Iranian leader was voted in by the Iranian people (stop laughing, it could be true), but I don't know what that has to do with Iraq or Bush. Are you trying to say the man was voted in because he would take a hard line towards the west? Or that he expunged his ambassadors because of Bush and Iraq? Where in the article is Bush or Iraq even mentioned?
Top Bottom