Brazil Officially Starts First Uranium Enrichment Facility

not that i dont believe you, but can you provide some links to back-up your statements?

 

great 'analysis'...it's a fact that stronger nations manipulate international organizations...just go and ask the friends and relatives of the millions of iraqis that suffered under sanctions kept in place mainly by the us...i think el baradei's statements summed things up very nicely, neatly, and concisely...bottom line is you and anybody else can make all the acussations you want, but iran hasnt done anything illegal and their program is under international inspection...its just funny that a developing country thats been the victim of a sponsored dictatorship, terrorism, invasions, imperialism, and wmds is trying to get one nuclear reactor and everybody's panties are in a bunch...now thats whats comical

 

their program is also under international inspection and as the head of the iaea el-baredai said they haven't really found anything, thus, iran hasnt done anything illegal

 

i'm just interested in the facts and i dont anything i've said is factually incorrect...it might come as a surprise to some, because they're used to getting their news about iran from the media or dont know anything about the country, but it doesn't take away from the fact that my posts are all accurate

 

ah, deckard
good to see you

i guess you missed the post i was replying to when i said this, but that and your biased in relation to iran dont surprise me

 

thankfully creepyfloyd isn't changing anyones opinions on the situation in iran i think he's more biased than the bushbots

 

Pakistan didnt just offer Iran nuclear technology (designs, centrifuges, equipment, etc). It also offered advice on what to do in case the world threatened to disarm it.

btw, Pakistan offered Iraq the same nuclear technology deal that it gave to Iran, Libya, North Korea and Syria. But apparently, Saddam didnt trust Pakistanis and declined the offer

 

The U.S. has the most powerful weapons and military.
The middle east has the most powerful oil supply.

Iran would receive alot less attention if they had less oil and they were located in South America.

According to the National Energy Policy Group report of May 2001 the largest remaining known oil reserves in the world (over 60%) are located in a triangle from Mosul in northern Iraq down along western Iran (Straits of Hormuz) across to Qatar, Saudi Arabia (then back up to Mosul).

This little triangle (small enough to fit in the Texas panhandle) is now covered and surrounded by U.S. military might. The bases being built in Western Iraq are just minutes from the largest oil fields in the world in Eastern Saudi Arabia. From Afghanistan to Tukmeninstan to Turkey, To Kuwait and especially in Iraq. The U.S. military is not far at all from oil.

Iran is just in the wrong place with the wrong commodity. We are far too dependent on oil to view things over in the Middle East any different, at least that is how the current admin seems to operate.

There are three main competitors for oil- U.S.(with Great Britain), Europe, Asia (China)
If you remember much of Europe and Aisa was not that fond of us sending in 250,000 troops right in the middle of all that oil.

 

Attacking and taking over a foreign country's embassy is tantamount to attacking that country.

 

Oh yeah, the US has really had full, unwavering support from the UN.

What a crock.

You always have a way to rationalize it all away, eh?

For inquiring minds, just google Iran and UAEA for why the remainder of the Planet (other that creepy)is concerned.

 

you're still harping on the things that happened 27 years ago? in that case, what is overthrowing iran's democratically elected government under mohammad mossadegh in 1953 and installing a dictatorship in its place? luckily the iranian people took matters into their own hands and gave him the boot in 1979

 

whats the uaea?

iran hasnt done anything illegal and their program is under international inspection....what else do you want? another manufactured crisis, because the us govt tells this 'issue' is important? you're falling for the same things most people did when it came to iraq and thats why you can't handle a different perspective based on facts instead of hyperbole and rhetoric

 

You said Iran had never attacked another country in it's "modern history".
Are saying that something that happened in 1979 is not modern history?

 

everything i say is true....it's not my fault that most people cant handle the truth...does that mean i should stop speaking it?

 

We invited them to join us.

That's an insult to me and al jazeera.

 

i was talking about a traditional war like one involving a military attack and invasion on the part of the iranians

 

You did not use the word "invasion".

 

The highly enrinched uranium you speak of is due to contaminated equipment (the equipment was contaminated before it reached iran), which the iaea has verified on multiple occassions by conducting tests on the equipment (see article below)...now as for the rest of your claims, i'm still waiting for evidence

Highly enriched uranium in Iran of little significance: ElBaradei

http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-236/0605149956145839.htm

Tehran, May 14, IRNA

IAEA-Iran-Nuclear

Head of the UN nuclear watchdog Mohamed ElBaradei said on Sunday he believes existence of highly enriched uranium in an Iranian atomic site was of little significance at the current juncture.

Arabic TV station Al Jazeera on Sunday quoted the International Atomic Energy Agency chief as saying research is still underway to find the source of contamination.

The source of contamination may have originated from machines that were imported to Iran, ElBaradei said, adding time is still needed to reach a conclusion in this respect.

He stressed Iran's right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and added a balance between Iran's nuclear rights and concerns of the international community would not be created through verbal disputes, but rather dialogue would be the solution.

 

i meant a traditional mililtary attack....i'd dont consider the takeover of the us embassy an act of war, i consider it payback for the us coup against mossadegh in 1953

 

child

No, I trust the IAEA and their concerns and the 35-nation IAEA board over your spin. You are the delusional one.