Iran won't give up enrichment

B

Buckdodgers

Guest
TEHRAN, Iran -
Iran said Tuesday it was ready for "serious negotiations" on its nuclear program, but a semi-official news agency said the government was unwilling to abandon nuclear enrichment — the key U.S. demand.

Top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani delivered a written response to ambassadors of Britain, China, Russia, France, Germany and Switzerland to a package of incentives aimed at persuading Iran to roll back on its nuclear program.

Larijani refused to disclose whether the response included an offer to suspend uranium enrichment, and no details of Iran's response were released. The state-run television quoted Larijani as telling the diplomats Iran "is prepared as of Aug. 23 to enter serious negotiations" with the countries that proposed the incentives package.

But the semi-official Fars news agency reported that Iran rejected calls to suspend "nuclear activities" — or uranium enrichment — and "instead has offered a new formula to resolve the issues through dialogue."

Iran delivered its response to the incentives offer nine days before a
U.N. Security Council deadline for Iran to halt enrichment or face possible economic and political sanctions.

Report: Iran won't give up enrichment - Yahoo! News

Does that mean George Bush will now ATTACK IRAN?
 
Buckdodgers, At least Iran is keeping its word to go with the Aug. 23rd deadline like they said they would do. I do suspect they are building nuclear weapons meanwhile delivering electricity and enegry to the people of Iran. I really think President Bush should do this diplomatically and keep an eye on this situation in Iran and if necessary send in US Troops to stop the nuclear missiles from being built but bomb the entire country of Iran would really not be right as there are millions of Iranians that have nothing to do with this unfortunate situation delevoping inside Iran.
 
Buckdodgers said:
I Dont Belive with that looney bin Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.Hes a Liar!!!
Click to expand...

Yes, I don't believe him either but at least he has the guts to say what he says, I think he did not except such a uproar from saying Israel should be wiped off the map which is actually a very common saying in the Middle East.
 
I Still Think George Bush should Get the Navy and Air Force to Take out Irans Nuclear sites.
 
Buckdodgers said:
I Still Think George Bush should Get the Navy and Air Force to Take out Irans Nuclear sites.
Click to expand...

He will but I don't want him causing alots of civilian injuries. I really think he should send a few teams in and disarm the nuclear missile silos. Israel for sure would send their air force, IAF to destory the nuclear missile silos and nuclear plants with no regard for civilian life so that is why I am hoping President Bush will make the right decision to send in a few specialized teams suited for the mission ahead because I know Israel won't care about the civilian causalites at all.
 
This is WAR on Terror! Civilians are gonna get killed anyway cause the government will use them as human shields.You saw what Hezbollah did.They used human shields.Isreal should get involved too cause it was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who said isreal will be wiped off the map.
 
Buckdodgers said:
This is WAR on Terror! Civilians are gonna get killed anyway cause the government will use them as human shields.You saw what Hezbollah did.They used human shields.Isreal should get involved too cause it was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who said isreal will be wiped off the map.
Click to expand...

Yes, We will get the terrorists alright but I don't think we need to cause that many civilian causalites. I also do think Israel needs to take control of the situation but not in a very dangerous manner. Israel did it once and bombed the nuclear reactor in 1981 and millions suffered. I think it is better to handle it more wisely this time around because we have laser precision guided missiles and another high technology stuff that are extremely accurate which means less civilians will get hurt. You can never be able to prevent civilian getting hurt or killed but there is alots that can be done to lessen the risk of civilians being hurt and killed. There is no reason why we can't do it in a safe, efficient manner and still get the job done.
 
Heath said:
...Israel did it once and bombed the nuclear reactor in 1981 and millions suffered...
Click to expand...

Er...where did you get that info? That is news to me and I would have most certainly heard about that....which is why I'm quite skeptical of that fact...

As I understood it, the reactor wasn't completed yet and Israel bombed it before it went operational. Therefore, the damage was restricted to the place where the reactor was sited.
 
Back
Top