depoix Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by Greybeard What's the rush ? It will be several years, - I've read as many as ten, before Iran has a deliverable nuclear weapon. I don't think the 'west' need get involved anyway; Israel would be Iran's primary target and there is little doubt that if Israel perceived a viable nuclear threat from Iran they would take it out without consulation. in the interests of world peace should we not disarm israel then, ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by serapis So given the fact that any sovereign state can back out if they wish, do you feel the same way about the USA backing out of the kyoto agreement? Or is that different because it’s the USA? If they had signed up to the Kyoto protocols, then at least they would be able to back out of them. But how cyclone feels doesn't alter the fact that signatories to the the NPT can rescind their membership if they wish. The fact that Iran is both a signatory, and still permits IAEA snap inspections of facilities, puts it two steps ahead of Israel in the legitimacy stakes, as Israel does neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by Phanerothyme If they had signed up to the , then at least they would be able to back out of them. But how cyclone feels doesn't alter the fact that signatories to the the NPT can rescind their membership if they wish. The fact that Iran is both a signatory, and still permits IAEA snap inspections of facilities, puts it two steps ahead of Israel in the legitimacy stakes, as Israel does neither. The IAEA's have commented many times on Iran’s unwillingness to fully co-operating with nuclear inquiries. Also, today Iran is now threatening to stop ALL inspections if they are referred to the Security Council. Now Iran can only be dealt sanctions if within the UN's charter Iran has done something they had previously agreed not to do by virtue of being a member of the UN. Also I had forgot to mention, Iran had acquired nuclear 'blueprints' for creating a critical part of a nuclear bomb from the disgraced Pakistani scientist AQ Khan. So nuclear research purely for energy requirements ..... to quote Ricky Tomlinson from the royal family, "My Arse"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by depoix in the interests of world peace should we not disarm israel then, ? OK - go ahead, - I'll hold your coat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venger Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by serapis That was a mistake made by Fox and again that was the first election. he was re-elected with a resounding majority the second time round so any question of his validity as president is misguided at best and at worst is plain ignorant. Fair dinkum, it was the previous election, but once the war was on, the US people wanted someones blood for 9/11. Bush was giving them it, with a splash of oil of course. If you can spare a few seconds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by serapis So given the fact that any sovereign state can back out if they wish, do you feel the same way about the USA backing out of the kyoto agreement? Or is that different because it’s the USA? I don't see what you're getting at. The USA never signed up to the kyoto protocols in the first place, but of course they have the right to withdraw from them if they had signed up. I happen to think that backing out of the NNPT and not signing up to Kyoto are both wrong, but the nationality in question doesn't alter my judgement. from the wikipedia Though there were legal challenges to the results in some states and allegations of problems with the results in Ohio, none had an effect on the final outcome. The final certified count showed 286 votes for Bush, 251 for Kerry, and 1 for Edwards (due to a faithless elector pledged to Kerry voting for Edwards). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by serapis The IAEA's have commented many times on Iran’s unwillingness to fully co-operating with nuclear inquiries. Also, today Iran is now threatening to stop ALL inspections if they are referred to the Security Council. Now Iran can only be dealt sanctions if within the UN's charter Iran has done something they had previously agreed not to do by virtue of being a member of the UN. Also I had forgot to mention, Iran had acquired nuclear 'blueprints' for creating a critical part of a nuclear bomb from the disgraced Pakistani scientist AQ Khan. I'm not disputing they want the bomb. I would want a nuke in their position, sitting on vast oil reserves and surrounded on all sides by enemy airbases. But to get Iran to comply fully with the IAEA is going to be difficult with an elephant the room... I suspect that as soon as their first research reactor is ready for operation it will be demolished by the IAF, in order that the only nuclear power in the region remains the only nuclear power in the region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Preacher Man Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by serapis Yes just as long as you do not question or challenge the ruling leaders. Otherwise Saddam’s secret police would come and take you away "for questioning" in the middle of the night and your family will never see you again. Over 1 million people vanished between 1979 and Saddam’s fall! That’s over 2.5% of the countries population! As apposed to the huge numbers we have killed in a very short time! Last I heard it was 120,000 dead since the beginning of the war, and that was a while ago... Originally posted by serapis As a country of 26.5 million people and relatively the population is split 50/50 among the genders (possibly not exact due to cultural preference for male children) then are you saying that gang rape is common place among over 10 million women? or are you referring to the major cities in the middle of the country as both the northern (Kurdish control) and the southern (British control) are relatively peaceful compared to Baghdad. As i said my friend has family based in Baghdad. This is where my information is from. Please dont be deluded into thinking that Basra is peacefull! Just because it is not reported in the news, it is still a violent place! Read some alternative points of view other than the mail! Originally posted by serapis You may doubt people are happier, but that’s your opinion. People no longer fear their rulers. I have seen many interviews with "Ordinary Iraqis" who rejoice at their new found freedom. Many, many people are now free to pursue their lives, so please do not misrepresent the Iraqi people as all being unhappy Saddam has gone! You go by what you see on tv. I will believe my friend who is in contact with her family still in Baghdad. Have you heard of propaganda? I did not say they were happy he was gone, did you even read my post? Originally posted by serapis Iraqi oil is being sold on the open market to pay compensation to neighbouring courtiers it has invaded and or attacked. To rebuild the countries economy and to pay for international intervention, i.e. both the gulf wars. You are not serious are you? I find it hard to debate a subject when somebody has such naieve views! Ignoring the first war when America asked the Iraqi people to rise up against Saddam. America claimed they would support the locals and give them arms and aid to take control, only to go back on their promise and let entire villages be massacered by Saddams soldiers for daring to rebel!!! Why should the Iraqi people pay for the second Gulf war??? What is your reasoning why a country that was not threatening any other should be invaded and be forced to foot the bill? Why not attack Saudi Arabia which has an equally attrocious Human rights record. Or what about the Congo, Tibet, Zimbabwe?? The reason is they dont have the worlds 2nd largest oil reserve! It is a known fact that American corporations have made billions in profit from contract to rebuild Iraq, billions that could have been ploughed back into the Iraqi economy by using Iraqi frims. America always has an agenda with anything it does and throws more resources into protecting the pipelines than it does protecting the local people. read these links http://www.aswataliraq.info BBC shorts you should maybe take time to listen to Local reporter on conditions and elections Americas plans for Iraqi oil You also ignore peoples comments about Israel and America's own dubiously elected (first time around) president. There is far more to this war than you make out. The WMD's have been proven to be ficticous, but there was people screaming that fact well before the war! You have a right wing attitude towards the war, you believe what you see on the news. A lot of people are now seing the war for what it is so maybe you should put down the mail and pickup the observer for an alternative view. After all the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drolnhoj Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Well done Kirky. You have managed to single handedly start the First Sheffield Forum War. Are you related to George Bush by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by Phanerothyme I think you are thinking of the election before last. This time he was elected, like it or not. As for Ahmadinejad banning Country and Western Music If he wants to nuke Shania Twain, maybe we should be helping them out.... Nothing wrong with Shania... She's got great erm... Features. Anyway as for bombing Iran, no.. Just no... If Bush is even considering it he is clearly even more of a tw@ than I already think he is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.