Bolton: Unanimity not needed on Iran

[marmar]

It's like the rerun of a bad movie. Sigh.:scared:

Bolton: Unanimity not necessary on Iran
By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer 13 minutes ago
VIENNA, Austria - Iran remained defiant Thursday as a U.N. deadline arrived for it to halt uranium enrichment, and the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said unanimity among the Security Council was not needed to take action against Tehran.

Key European nations will meet with Iran in September in a last-ditch effort to seek a negotiated solution to the standoff over Tehran's refusal to freeze uranium enrichment, a senior U.N. diplomat said Thursday.

President Bush said "there must be consequences" for Iran, adding that the war between Tehran-backed Hezbollah militants and Israel demonstrated that "the world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in Iran."

The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in a report obtained by The Associated Press that Iran shows no signs of freezing enrichment, adding that Tehran started work on a new batch Aug. 24.

The confidential IAEA report will be given to its 35-nation board. That is expected to trigger U.N. Security Council members — by mid-September — to begin considering economic or political sanctions.

The rest is at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060831/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear

[seemslikeadream]

1. WAR!

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said unanimity among the Security Council was not needed to take action against Tehran.












President Bush said "there must be consequences" for Iran

[aquart]

5. Uh huh. With what army?

Who is it that Rummy plans to send against this new Great Satan? I know these boys are deluded, but where's the army? We don't have enough to protect Baghdad, and Georgie wants to nuke Iran? Has he counted heads in that country?

We are calling up out of shape marines. We have pushed enlistment age to FORTY-TWO. WE HAVE NO WAR MACHINE.

Oh, and we also have no steel mills. Or tool and die industry. So all our war materiel has to be imported.

I love a nice delusional war. But we can't even win because we have no way to fight.

[marmar]

8. True. And I have a feeling there would be a massive mutiny...

Many thousands of soldiers who'd refuse to fight, and many millions of potential draftees who'd say "Hell No." Clearly the war plans have been drawn up, though.

[aquart]

24. You can draw anything. Pencils are cheap.

We have NO allies. No military. No war materiel. Some old bombs Georgie wants to use.

If he nukes Iran, will the fallout destroy all agriculture in the Middle East? Would you buy a Carmel tomato after that?

Not that he won't give the order. But it will destroy us and everything we hope to accomplish on earth. It will end Israel's economic viability. They aren't an oil nation.

It will effectively end us.

[seemslikeadream]

9. Rumsfeld knew everything you've said before the invasion of Iraq

Did that stop him? He knew where a war with Iraq would lead. Do you think he is stupid?

[Bonhomme Richard]

12. They don't need an army because..............

they don't need to win the war. These people are all about perpetual war. What they do have are aircraft that can start the war. Once started the minions will complacently fall in line just like Iraq.
You can't use logic when your strategic opponent is insane.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

13. Oh goodie, we'll use the Israeli invasion plans.

need we be reminded that
- lose
rhymes with
- use?

[seemslikeadream]

17. They have no intention of winning any war

you are correct, perpetual war. And when things really get out of hand, what else is there to do, we will be forced to fight and defend this country. Does any one think we will have any other option?

[marmar]

23. "we will be forced to fight and defend this country"

From BushCo? You betcha.

[SutaUvaca]

2. Oh my god!!

It's the same hype, the same lying hype used for selling war on Iraq.
God help us - again!

[WhiteTara]

15. If that scares you, Syria is next

Welcome to DU :hi:

[truebrit71]

3. Any questions as to how badly this misadministration wants another war?

This is the same rhetoric, and the same hyberbolic bullshit shoved down our throats as the last time....the only difference is that Iran really DOES have some naughty technology, unlike Iraq....

The other thing to bear in mind is that the Iranian army will not simply lie down like their Iraqi counterparts, they are far better equipped and far better trained, and Russia and China will not sit idly by if Iran gets attacked....

Which means, that when Iran gets attacked it will be by the Israeli's, not the USA, and we (the US) will have to rush to the Israeli's defense when Iran counter-attacks...

Gulf of Tonkin anyone?

God help us all when this happens....

[krispos42]

18. I think China would be quite happy to let us attack Iran...

while they ship munitions and arms to Tehran.

Then, while we're spending billions of dollars a day bombing the shit out of Iran and trying to stop Iranian forces from siezing Kuwait and closing down Gulf oil tanker traffic...

Chine cashes in their trillion dollars of US Treasury bonds they own.

Once our economy self-destructs, China is the dominate world superpower. Power is relative, not absolute.

[truebrit71]

22. But China still needs oil. Gobs and gobs of it...

..and the deal just worked out with Venezuela won't be enough...

[krispos42]

32. Once we can't afford to drive or heat our houses, plenty for China!

Besides, Iran is China's major oil source. Iran's gonna need a lot of money to fund a war. Money the rest of the world will be happy to give them in exchange for cheap oil.

[wakeme2008]

4. there are not any Sanctions unless all Security Council member vote for

them 100%....

that the way the UN works Mr. Bolton.

[jayfish]

19. Only Permanent Members Need To Be In Agreement.

Permanent members can also abstain which, IMO, is equivalent to a yea vote.

Jay

[Kailassa]

31. Bolton did not say unamity was not needed for sanctions

against Iran.

He said unamity was not needed for action against Iran.

In the lead up to the war against Iraq, action was used as a euphamism for war.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. And here comes Bolton's moment in the sun.

This is what he was put there for.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

21. doesn't he turn to dust in direct sunlight?

Or was that Rummie?

[mike_c]

7. Bolton is telegraphing that the U.S. is prepared to commit more...

...war crimes if necessary in order to fulfill its foreign policy dictates. Its time for the U.N. to consider sanctions against the U.S., IMO.

[catmandu57]

10. You're damn right mike

it's time for us to get our ass beat and sent to bed without supper. As long as we have these bastards in charge the world is in danger. To answer a post above we don't have a ground army, but we've got a fuckload of nukes going to waste, and that's just what these insane sons of bitches plan on using i can feel it in my bones.

[radfringe]

11. now rumsfeld's comments about appeasement makes sense

it's a set-up. the bushies and chicken hawks knew it would be "controversial" but they don't care about that...

Iran's "deadline" is today - they failed to meet it. In the previous few days we've had cheney/rove/rummy out there setting the stage.

bush's speech today implied a pending invasion of Iran. Bolton at the UN essentially said we'd go it alone...

so what's going to happen when a DEM wants to review the evidence, investigate or work through diplomatic channels? HE/SHE is going to be accused of wanting to appease terrorists in the same manner other DEMs have been accused of being "unpatriotic".

the closer to the election we get and the gloomier the poll numbers are for repugs the higher the likelyhood of a terror attack. the repugs need it to be re(s)elected and to put their rubberstamps on another war.

[denverbill]

14. And they compare Iran's leader to Hitler?

Hitler was the one making demands and threatening war if his demands weren't met. The Iranians aren't threatening to invade anyone if their demands aren't met. The US is the belligerent party in this mess, exactly as we were in Iraq. The world community tried to 'appease' the US prior to Iraq, but as with Hitler, the US did not want peace. Hitler was bitterly disappointed by the Munich agreements. He exaggerated his demands on Czechoslovakia because he wanted war with them. When Chamberlain gave in to him, Hitler was not happy. Bush threatened Iraq if they didn't allow the inspectors back in, so they let the inspectors back in. Then he demanded they produce proof that they had destroyed their WMD, which they produced. Nothing Iraq or the UN did could have dissuaded Bush from invading Iraq. Just as appeasing Hitler in 1938 didn't stop him from invading the remainder of Czechoslovakia, so too appeasing Bush didn't stop him from invading Iraq, and won't stop him from invading Iran.

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. I've been saying as much for months.

Bolton will claim that the trigger is the security council deadline, today, and that if Iran doesn't comply that no more will be needed for the US to act on the security council deadline, no matter what the UN might say about further conditions.

The US demanded that Iran cede the primary point before negotiations begin, which Iran very rightly refused to do -- if they ceded that point, there would be no purpose to any further negotiations. Obviously, the US is not interested in negotiations. PNAC wants its war.

[seemslikeadream]

20. And conveniently Brewster Jennings & Associates is out of Iran

Dick Cheney exposed Valerie Plame to cover up his association with A.Q. Khan's Nuclear Walmart. Read about it here: http://s93118771.onlinehome.us/DU/AMERICANJUDAS.pdf

[endarkenment]

25. Have we drawn a line in the sand yet?

They don't seem to have this organized very well. The ultimatum has been ignored. We have been dissed. Aren't we sposed to get all huffy now?

"President Stupid said "there must be consequences" for Iran, adding that the war between Tehran-backed Hezbollah militants and Israel demonstrated that "the world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in Iran.""

Well that is sort of huffy. What is this grave threat? That we can't just clobber folks into submission anymore? Is a capacity to not submit a threat? I love Presidunce Stupid, he fills me with inertia.

[Judi Lynn]

26. U.S. goes full-bore on Iran sanctions

U.S. goes full-bore on Iran sanctions

WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 (UPI) -- The Bush administration was busy Thursday rounding up support for sanctions against Iran, which defied an Aug. 31 deadline to stop enriching uranium.

The United States faces opposition to sanctions in the U.N. Security Council from China and Russia, but is on a course to strengthen its own existing sanctions and collect more from Britain, France and Germany, The New York Times said.

The administration is also seeking to persuade European financial institutions to end new lending to Iran, and sources told the newspaper some Swiss banks have quietly agreed.

The sanctions the United States are seeking begin with an embargo on the sale of nuclear-related goods to Iran, freezing of overseas assets and a ban on travel for Iranian officials directly involved in the nuclear program, the report said.

Iranian officials have said in recent months it would respond to sanctions with actions of its own, from cutting oil production to threatening to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, as North Korea did.
(snip/)

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060831-072457-4748r

[DoYouEverWonder]

27. Of course, Israel can ignore all the UN orders they please

and instead the US will make sure they get that next order of cluster bombs ASAP.

[toopers]

28. The UN is a joke . . .

Nothing ever happens and no one ever follows through.

[Julius Civitatus]

29. Setting up deadlines so they can justify a future attack

This is so obvious.

[cosmicdot]

30. how timely that, today, 'the Scream' was reported as found

IOW, Bolton increases the drumbeat volume on the Bomb Iran radio dial.

[struggle4progress]

33. EU Says It's Too Early to Punish Iran

By ROBERT WIELAARD : Associated Press Writer
Sep 1, 2006 : 6:59 pm ET

LAPPEENRANTA, Finland -- .. "This is not the time or place" for sanctions, Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, said after a meeting of the bloc's foreign ministers. "For the EU, diplomacy remains the No. 1 way forward." ..

U.S. and European diplomats have said they are focusing on low-level punishment at first to win backing from Russia and China ..

http://www.heraldsun.com/nationworld/14-765985.html

The UN was blindsided by Bushista games in the lead-up to the Iraq war -- folks are gonna be more careful this time ...

[struggle4progress]

34. Here's what the IAEA says about their report

Report on Iran Nuclear Safeguards Sent to Agency´s Board and UN Security Council
Staff Report
31 August 2006

IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei today released his report Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The report was prepared at the request of the United Nation´s Security Council. Its circulation is restricted, and unless the IAEA Board of Governors and Security Council decide otherwise, the Agency can not authorise its release to the public ..

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2006/iran_compliance.html